Dismissed

M.Dhanapal v. C.Jameela

Kerala HC15 Dec 2023RSA/683/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court at Ernakulam dismissed the Regular Second Appeal filed by a tenant under CPC Section 100 as withdrawn. While declining to grant the full six-month period sought due to lack of notice, the Court granted a four-month extension to vacate premises and clear rent arrears, contingent on filing an affidavit surrendering possession. Eviction proceedings resume on failure to comply.

What did the court decide?

Appellant granted four months time from today to vacate the building and clear rent arrears, conditional upon filing an affidavit before the trial court within two weeks.

M.Dhanapal Vs C.Jameela — Partition | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945

¶5

RSA NO. 683 OF 2023

¶6

AGAINST THE DECREE AND JUDGMENT DATED 03.07.2023 IN A.S.NO.22/2022 ON

¶7

THE FILES OF THE COURT OF THE 1ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,
KOZHIKODE ARISING FROM THE DECREE AND JUDGMENT DATED 15.01.2022 IN

¶8

O.S.NO.366/2017 ON THE FILES OF THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF-I, KOZHIKODE

¶9

APPELLANT(S)/APPELLANT/DEFENDANT:

¶10

M.DHANAPAL

¶11

AGED 72 YEARS, S/O A.L.MUTHUPARUMAL, NALLENNA TEXTILES,
HOTEL SANJNA BUILDING, KALATHINKUNNU AMSOM DESOM, MAVOOR
ROAD, KOZHIKODE TALUK, PIN - 673004
BY ADVS.
M.PROMODH KUMAR
MAYA CHANDRAN

¶12

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS:

¶13

1C.JAMEELA

¶14

AGED 69 YEARS
W/O A.T.UMMER KOYA, "SUPER VIEW", NO.4, JAYANTHI NAGAR
HOUSING COLONY,MOONNALINGAL, KALATHINKUNNU AMSOM
DESOM,KOZHIKODE TALUK, PIN - 673032

¶15

2A.T.HARIS
AGED 53 YEARS

¶16

S/O A.T.UMMER KOYA, "SUPER VIEW", NO.4, JAYANTHI NAGAR
HOUSING COLONY,MOONNALINGAL, KALATHINKUNNU AMSOM
DESOM,KOZHIKODE TALUK, PIN - 673032

¶17

3 JAHANA AGED 55 YEARS

¶18

W/O N.R.ABDUL NAZAR, AYISHAS, RAROTH AMSOM DESOM,
THAMARASSERY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673573

¶19

4 A.T.SUJIRINA AGED 50 YEARS W/O ARIF,EDATHANATTUKARA, PARAKKOTT, NALUKANDAM, PALAKKADU DISTRICT, PIN - 678601

¶20

5 SHAMNA

¶21

AGED 46 YEARS

¶22

R.S.A. No. 683 of 2023

¶23

¶24

W/O AMIR MUHAMMAD HAJI, KOLIKKAL HOUSE,
UNNIKULAM AMSOM DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673574
6SAJINA
AGED 41 YEARS
W/O BASHEER, CHOMATH PARAMBIL, "JAMEELAS HUT",
KACHERI AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK, PIN - 673005

¶25

THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

R.S.A. No. 683 of 2023

¶27

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

Dated this the 15^th day of December, 2023

¶30

This regular second appeal has been filed under order XLII Rule 1 read with Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (“CPC” hereinafter) challenging the decree and judgment in A.S. No.22 of 2022 dated 03.07.2023 on the files of the Court of the First Additional District Judge, Kozhikode arose from decree and judgment in O.S. No.366 of 2017 dated 15.01.2022 on the files of the Court of the Principal Munsiff-I, Kozhikode. The appellant herein is the defendant and the respondents are the plaintiffs in O.S. No.366 of 2017.

¶31

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant on admission.

¶32

The parties in this appeal will be referred as plaintiffs and defendant relegating their status before the trial court.

¶33

Admittedly, appellant herein who is the defendant in O.S. No.366/2017 is the tenant of the plaint schedule

¶34

R.S.A. No. 683 of 2023

¶35

¶36

room. Even though, the title of the the 1 st plaintif f over the plaint schedule room was disputed, it is evident from the verdicts of the trial court as well as the Appellate Court that the 1 st plaintif f is one among the co-owners of the building where the appellant has been possessing the room as a tenant. Accordingly, the trial court directed the defendant to vacate the plaint schedule room to Supplemental plaintif f Nos. 2 to 7 within a period of one month and also to pay arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 1,40,363/-.

¶37

Even though the learned counsel for the appellant attempted to substantiate points to admit this regular second appeal challenging concurrent verdicts, this Court was not inclined to admit the appeal, for want of any substantial question of law. Faced with the situation, the learned counsel for the appellant sought permission to withdraw the second appeal and also sought for at least six months time for the appellant to vacate the building, so as to facilitate an alternative accommodation suitable

¶38

R.S.A. No. 683 of 2023

¶39

¶40

for the appellant.

¶41

Since no notice given to the otherside, this Court has limitation to grant time sought for. However, in the interest of justice and to facilitate the appellant to f i nd out a suitable accommodation, while dismissing the second appeal as withdrawn, I am inclined to grant four months time from today to the appellant to vacate the building on condition that the appellant shall f i le an afdavit before fi the trial court within a period of two weeks from today undertaking to surrender vacant possession of the plaint schedule room within a period of four months and also on condition to clear the entire arrears of rent within a period of two weeks from today.

¶42

It is specif i cally ordered that, on failure to f i le the afdavit or to clear the arrears of rent, the grace fi period granted by this Court shall not be available to the appellant and eviction proceedings can go on, forthwith.

¶43

Accordingly, this regular second appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn, without being admitted, as

¶44

R.S.A. No. 683 of 2023

¶45

¶46

indicated above.

¶47

All interlocutory application also stands

dismissed.

Sd/-

A. BADHARUDEEN

JUDGE

M.Dhanapal v. C.Jameela

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Dhanapal v. C.Jameela

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ammu Moolya Vs Francis Chacko

Saidalavi Vs Aboobacker

Purayil Gopalan, Vs Purayil Vilasini

M.G.Bhaskaran Vs Shylaja

M.R.Radhakrishnan Vs K.Anathan Nambiar

Thayukutty Vs Manikandan