Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
29 judgments · newest first · showing 1–29
The appellant, a grandson of the original defendant, was impleaded as a legal heir in execution proceedings after the original defendant died. He later filed an interlocutory application under Order I Rule 10 seeking deletion of his name, claiming he was not a legal heir and that he enjoyed tenancy …
The appellants, owners of three shop rooms, filed an eviction petition against the respondents for non‑payment of rent and unauthorised sub‑letting of one of the rooms. The trial court granted eviction for all three rooms, but the appellate authority limited eviction to two rooms, and the High Court …
The dispute concerned a theatre built on land owned by Sankara Kurup. After his death, his son Viswanatha claimed ownership, while the son‑in‑law Kumara managed the theatre and later claimed tenancy under the Kerala Land Reforms Act. The Land Tribunal rejected Kumara’s tenancy claim, finding he was …
The landlord (appellant) owned eight shops and sought eviction of tenants, including the respondent, under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 on the ground of bona‑fide need. After a protracted litigation spanning more than a decade, the trial court finally passed an eviction …
The landlords filed eviction petitions under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 invoking sections 11(4)(iii) and 11(4)(iv). The Rent Control Court granted eviction only on the reconstruction ground (11(4)(iv),) and the landlords appealed to the First Appellate Authority, which …
The appellant, a tenant of a premises in Trivandrum, held a licence to operate a hardware shop that was originally granted with the landlord's written consent in 2001. When the licence expired, the corporation refused renewal because the landlord did not provide fresh consent. The Tribunal for Local …
The Supreme Court examined the scope of the High Court's revisional jurisdiction under the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973, the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 and the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960. The issue was whether the High …
The landlord filed an eviction suit under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, and the tenant claimed Kudikidappukaran status under the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963. The Rent Controller referred the status question to the Land Tribunal, which held the tenant was only a tenant, …
The dispute concerned eviction of Dunlop India Limited from premises leased under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. The landlord alleged that the tenant had ceased to occupy the premises for more than six months without reasonable cause, first from June 1998 and later from …
The owners of a commercial premises in Cochin filed an eviction petition under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, claiming bonafide personal requirement. The Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority dismissed the petition, finding no such requirement, and …
The respondent obtained a decree for possession of a suit property in 1990, which was later enforced through execution proceedings in 2004. The appellant, after the execution commenced, filed a suit for specific performance of an alleged oral agreement and sought an injunction to stay the eviction. …
A joint Hindu family owned a building that was let to a partnership firm, which later converted into a private limited company in 1948. The landlords, members of the family, sought eviction under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 on the grounds of bona‑fide need for business …
The tenant, G. Reghunathan, leased a room for a jewellery shop under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 and subsequently altered the premises without the landlord's consent while also defaulting on rent. The landlord sought eviction on two grounds: non‑payment of rent under …
Vithalbhai Pvt. Ltd., the lessor of a lease that expired on 24 June 1984, served a notice to the lessee demanding vacant possession and filed a suit for eviction on 16 April 1984, twelve weeks before the lease term ended. The defendant argued that the suit was premature and not maintainable. The …
The tenants (appellants) challenged a second eviction petition filed by the landlord (respondent) under Section 15(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, claiming the landlord’s bona‑fide requirement for his son. An earlier appellate authority had held that the second …
The tenant, Nalakath Sainuddin, held a single tenancy over a shop with two doors and sublet one door to Koorikadan Sulaiman, who later purchased the entire property from the original owners. The landlord filed an eviction suit invoking three grounds under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent …
The appellant, P. John Chandy & Co., was the tenant of premises originally let in 1949 and had sub-let the property on several occasions, including after the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 came into force. The landlord, John P. Thomas, sought eviction under Section 11(4)(i) of …
The appellants, legal representatives of a deceased tenant, occupied a shop room. The landlords sought eviction under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, claiming a bona‑fide need for the premises to be used by their daughter and son‑in‑law. The tenants …
The landlord, who occupied part of a building, filed an eviction petition against the tenant occupying the remaining part, invoking Sections 11(3), 11(8) and 11(4)(iv) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. The Rent Controller rejected the claim under 11(8) and 11(4)(iv) but …
The appellant, a tenant of a shop let under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, saw the shop completely destroyed by fire. He rebuilt a new shop on the vacant land without the landlord's consent, prompting the landlord to sue for demolition of the new structure and possession of …
The appellant, T.K. Lathika, became the owner of a building by gift deed in 1980 and entered into a fresh lease with the long‑term tenant. She filed an eviction petition under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 on 1 July 1981, before the one‑year moratorium …
The landlord (Davis) owned a building where he ran a hotel‑bar and sought eviction of his tenant (Sebastian), who operated a provision shop, under Section 11(8) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, claiming a bona‑fide need for additional accommodation for a jewellery and …
The landlord (respondent) filed a petition under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 seeking eviction of the tenant (appellant) on the ground that the premises were required bona fide for his own use, alleging that another property he occupied was under imminent …
The landlords filed an eviction petition under Section 11 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, which the Rent Controller accepted, directing them to sue in civil court. The tenant first sought relief under Section 72B of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, claiming assignment of …
The appellant, a landlady, sought eviction of the tenant on grounds of rent arrears and a claim to demolish the shed. After the Rent Controller ordered eviction only on rent default, the landlady obtained a reversal of the bona fide need finding on appeal, prompting the tenant to file revisions …
The appellants, Carona Shoe Co. Ltd. and another, were tenants of a shop that had been let out by a mortgagee who held the property under a mortgage from the owner. After the owner redeemed the mortgage, the mortgagee and a subsequent mortgagee sued to recover possession of the shop, and the trial …
The landlord sought eviction of a tenant who was using a building for non‑residential purposes, claiming a bona‑fide need to occupy the premises himself as a residence. The Rent Controller, the Appellate Authority, the District Judge and the Kerala High Court all upheld the landlord’s claim under …
Shyamaraju Hegde appealed to the Supreme Court against a Karnataka High Court order dismissing his revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 50(1) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act. The High Court had relied on its own Full Bench decision in M.M. Yaragatti …
The landlord sought eviction of the tenant under Section 11(4)(i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, alleging the tenant had sublet the premises without consent. The Rent Controller and successive courts upheld the eviction. The tenant argued that Section 108(j) of the …
