Mathew vs Mathew K J Advocate - R Rahul, Sujith Kumar T U, Sujith Kumar T UChristinemathew, — 100323/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26. Disposed: Contested--DECREED WITH COST on 30th March 2026.
OS - ORIGINAL SUIT
CNR: KLKT170007622023
e-Filing Number
15-11-2023
Filing Number
100560/2023
Filing Date
15-11-2023
Registration No
100323/2023
Registration Date
15-11-2023
Court
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Judge
1-MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Decision Date
30th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DECREED WITH COST
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Mathew
Adv. MURALIDHAR D
Respondent(s)
Mathew K J Advocate - R Rahul, Sujith Kumar T U, Sujith Kumar T UChristinemathew,
Hearing History
Judge: 1-MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Disposed
Order/Judgement
Call On
For Hearing
Defence Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 30-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 25-03-2026 | Order/Judgement |
| 16-03-2026 | Call On |
| 04-03-2026 | For Hearing |
| 19-02-2026 | Defence Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: O.S. 323/2023 Court Decision: The Munsiff's Court decreed the suit in favor of plaintiff Mathew, holding him entitled to recover ₹1,94,000 (after deducting the ₹1 lakh security deposit) from defendant Mathew K.J. as arrears of rent with 12% interest from suit date to decree date and 6% thereafter, plus litigation costs. Key Reasoning: The court rejected the defendant's counterclaims about Covid-related rent exemptions and business obstruction, finding them unsubstantiated. The defendant admitted vacating the shop room and acknowledged rent arrears since April 2020. Previous Rent Control Court proceedings had already ordered the defendant to pay arrears of ₹2,09,000, with the appellate court dismissing his appeal, establishing the debt's validity. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: O.S. 323/2023 Court Decision: The Munsiff's Court decreed the suit in favor of plaintiff Mathew, holding him entitled to recover ₹1,94,000 (after deducting the ₹1 lakh security deposit) from defendant Mathew K.J. as arrears of rent with 12% interest from suit date to decree date and 6% thereafter, plus litigation costs. Key Reasoning: The court rejected the defendant's counterclaims about Covid-related rent exemptions and business obstruction, finding them unsubstantiated. The defendant admitted vacating the shop room and acknowledged rent arrears since April 2020. Previous Rent Control Court proceedings had already ordered the defendant to pay arrears of ₹2,09,000, with the appellate court dismissing his appeal, establishing the debt's validity. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts