KIZHAKKAYIL SUHARA AND ORS. versus MANHANTAVIDA ABOOBACKER (D) BY LRS. AND ANR.

KIZHAKKAYIL SUHARA AND ORS. versus MANHANTAVIDA ABOOBACKER (D) BY LRS. AND ANR.

Since arguments regarding dependency and ownership of other buildings were not raised before the lower courts, the just and appropriate course is to remand the case to the Rent Control Appellate Authority to decide whether the landlords' need is bona fide if the premises are required for the married daughter who owns other residential and non-residential buildings.

Parties
Appellants: Kizhakkayil Suhara and Ors.; Respondents: Manhantavida Aboobacker (D) by LRs.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
26 September 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed; order under challenge set aside; matter remanded to Rent Control Appellate Authority for fresh disposal according to law.
Legal Topics
Eviction, Bona Fide Requirement, Dependency of Family Members, Kerala Buildings (lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965
Rent Control Property Law Eviction Bona Fide Requirement Dependency of Family Members Kerala Buildings (lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kizhakkayil Suhara and Ors.

Appellants

Manhantavida Aboobacker (D) by LRs.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the landlord's need for eviction is bona fide when premises required for business of married daughter and son-in-law who own other buildings?
  2. 2 Whether the married daughter and son-in-law can be considered 'dependent' on the landlord under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, when they own residential and non-residential buildings?

Ratio Decidendi

Since arguments regarding dependency and ownership of other buildings were not raised before the lower courts, the just and appropriate course is to remand the case to the Rent Control Appellate Authority to decide whether the landlords' need is bona fide if the premises are required for the married daughter who owns other residential and non-residential buildings.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order under challenge set aside; matter remanded to Rent Control Appellate Authority for fresh disposal according to law.

Orders

  • Order of the High Court set aside.
  • R.C.A. No. 88 of 1994 restored to the file of the Appellate Authority (District Judge), Thalassery, for disposal in accordance with law.