Muhammed Ashraf vs Vasundara — 128/2025

Case under Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (Kerala) Section Section 23. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED on 19th May 2026.

Case disposed

Restor.Ptn - RESTORATION PETITION

CNR: KLTR170019092025

Filing Number

1377/2025

Filing Date

16-Dec-2025

Registration No

128/2025

Registration Date

16-Dec-2025

Court

Munsiff Court, Chavakkad

Judge

1-Munsiff Chavakkad

Decision Date

19-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED

Last updated 29-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (Kerala) Section Section 23
Ia/1/2025 Classification : Delay Condonation Application Section Muhammed AshrafVasundara

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Muhammed Ashraf

    Adv. AKTHAR AHAMMED

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Vasundara

  2. 2.Dr.jithendrakumar

  3. 3.Biju

  4. 4.Ajayakumar

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-May-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Case Summary: 128/2025 The Rent Control Court of Chavakkad dismissed Restoration Petition 128/2025 after both parties (petitioner Muhammed Ashraf and respondents Vasundara, Dr. Jithendrakumar, and Biju) filed a joint petition revealing the dispute was settled. The court found that vacant possession of the tenanted premises had been handed over to the landlord, and accordingly dismissed the petition as abandoned and not pressed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 19-May-2026

    Disposed

    Munsiff Chavakkad

  4. 23-Mar-2026

    Call on

    Munsiff Chavakkad

  5. 05-Feb-2026

    Adjourned

    Munsiff Chavakkad

  6. 19-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 16-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 128/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 128/2025 The Rent Control Court of Chavakkad dismissed Restoration Petition 128/2025 after both parties (petitioner Muhammed Ashraf and respondents Vasundara, Dr. Jithendrakumar, and Biju) filed a joint petition revealing the dispute was settled. The court found that vacant possession of the tenanted premises had been handed over to the landlord, and accordingly dismissed the petition as abandoned and not pressed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case