K.a.Vasu v. Harinakshi
Case brief
What is this about?
A tenant challenged a confirmed eviction order for bona fide need of owners and rent arrears. The High Court dismissed the revision but granted six months' time to vacate, conditioned on payment of arrears and a peaceful surrender affidavit.
What did the court decide?
Petition dismissed with directions to vacate premises by 31/12/2009 upon filing an undertaking for peaceful surrender and payment of arrears.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI
TUESDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2009 / 16TH ASHADHA 1931
RCRev..No. 154 of 2009()
-----------------------RCA.26/2004 of ADDL.SESSN.COURT (ADHOC-II)KASARAGOD RCP.31/2003 of PRL.MUNSIFF, KASARAGOD
PETITIONER/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT IN RCP
---------------------------------------------------
K.A.VASU, S/O.KORAGA, ANEBAGILU, KASARAGOD.
BY ADV. SRI.V.V.ASOKAN SRI.P.P.RAMACHANDRAN
RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS IN RCP
- --------------1. HARINAKSHI D/O LATE ANANDA RAO ANANDA NILAYAM NULLIPPADY, KASARAGOD
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the revision petition challenging eviction orders based on rent arrears and bona fide need of owners should be admitted.
Whether the eviction order passed by the Rent Control Court and confirmed by the Appellate Authority requires interference under revisional jurisdiction.
Whether the tenant should be granted a specific period to vacate the premises before the enforcement of the eviction order.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
K.A. VASU
- respondent
HARINAKSHI
- respondent
SUJATHA
- respondent
SHAILAJA
- respondent
SATHYA ANASUYA
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court