Manakkadavath Moidunni vs Manakkadavath Moidunni
2021 Latest Caselaw 3848 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                          PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD

                             &

          THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMAR

  TUESDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 13TH MAGHA,1942

                   RCRev..No.274 OF 2017

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 31-03-2017 IN RCA 19/2014 OF
RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY (ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
COURT), TIRUR REVERSING THE ORDER DATED 25-02-2014 IN RCP
17/2013 OF RENT CONTROL COURT (MUNSIFF MAGISTRATE COURT),
PONNANI.


REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT    :

            MANAKKADAVATH MOIDUNNI, AGED 57 YEARS,
            S/O.MOHAMMED, ERAMANGALAM AMSOM AND
            DESOM,PONNANI TALUK, NOW RESIDING AT
            KUMILAVALAPPU, POST GRAMAM-679 579,
            VALIYAMCODE, PONNANI TALUK,
            MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

            BY ADV. SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF.

RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/PETITIONER       :

            KADAPPURATHAKATH THEKKETHIL HANEEFA,
            AGED 64 YEARS, S/O.ABDURAHIMAN, VALIYAMCODE
            AMSOM DESOM,P.O.VELIYAMCODE, PONNANI TALUK,
            MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 579.

            R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN.



     THIS RENT CONTROL REVISION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
15-01-2021, THE COURT ON 02-02-2021 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
                 A.HARIPRASAD & T.V.ANILKUMAR, J J.
                      --------------------------------------
                          RCR No.274 of 2017
                      --------------------------------------
                Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2021

                                ORDER

A.HARIPRASAD, J

Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and respondent.

2. Learned counsel submitted that the tenant has vacated the

building and handed over vacant possession to the landlord. There was

some monetary disputes between the parties, which is not a subject matter

of this proceedings. It is therefore submitted that the matter has become

infructuous. Hence the revision petition is dismissed as infructuous.

All pending interlocutory applications will stand dismissed.

A. HARIPRASAD, JUDGE.

T.V.ANILKUMAR JUDGE

amk