{"id":72445,"date":"2011-02-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-02-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011"},"modified":"2018-01-28T19:16:36","modified_gmt":"2018-01-28T13:46:36","slug":"shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011","title":{"rendered":"Shabandri Real Estate Limited vs S.K.Syed Ummar Sahib on 4 February, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Shabandri Real Estate Limited vs S.K.Syed Ummar Sahib on 4 February, 2011<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRCRev..No. 427 of 2005()\n\n\n1. SHABANDRI REAL ESTATE LIMITED, A\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. S.K.SYED UMMAR SAHIB, S\/O.LATE S.K.SYED\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. S.K.SYED HUSSAIN, S\/O.S.K.HUSSAIN\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.P.MOHAMMED NIAS\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.K.M.FIROZ\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice N.K.BALAKRISHNAN\n\n Dated :04\/02\/2011\n\n O R D E R\n                 PIUS C. KURIAKOSE &\n                N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.\n                ----------------------------------\n                  R.C.R. No.427 of 2005\n                  ------------------------------\n         Dated this the 4th day of February 2011\n\n\n                          O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
Pius C. Kuriakose, J.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      The landlord, a company, is in revision challenging the<\/p>\n
judgment    of  the    Rent    Control     Appellate Authority<\/p>\n
dismissing the rent control petition after setting aside the<\/p>\n
order of eviction which had been passed by the Rent<\/p>\n
Control Court on the ground of sub-letting\/transfer under<\/p>\n
Section 11(4)(i) of Act 2 of 1965. The landlord had sought<\/p>\n
eviction on the ground under Section 11(4)(i) and also<\/p>\n
under Section 11(4)(ii). As the ground under Section 11<\/p>\n
(4)(ii) does not survive in this revision we need consider<\/p>\n
only the right of the landlord to obtain eviction on the<\/p>\n
ground of sub-letting. In the RCP, the tenants, R1 and R2<\/p>\n
alone were made parties. The names of the alleged sub-<\/p>\n
R.C.R. No.427 of 2005<\/p>\n
                            -: 2 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
lessees or transferees were not disclosed even.         The<\/p>\n
allegation in the RCP in the context of the ground under<\/p>\n
Section 11(4)(i) was that contrary to the terms of the<\/p>\n
agreement, the tenants have sub-let portions of the building<\/p>\n
to strangers after receiving huge amount by way of<\/p>\n
premium and on a higher rent. The further allegations are<\/p>\n
that the hotel business to conduct which the building had<\/p>\n
been let out has been closed down and at the time of the<\/p>\n
filing of the RCP new business under the name and style<\/p>\n
Lucky Collections and Lucky Pardah were being conducted<\/p>\n
by totally strangers. There is further allegation that the<\/p>\n
above sub-lease was not terminated despite a notice issued<\/p>\n
under the proviso to Section 11(4)(i). The 2nd respondent<\/p>\n
one of the tenants did not contest. The 1st respondent alone<\/p>\n
filed   objections   completely    denying  the  allegations<\/p>\n
regarding sub-lease\/transfer.      However, in Ext.A5 reply<\/p>\n
which he had sent to the statutory notice received by him<\/p>\n
he had stated that the businesses which are being<\/p>\n
R.C.R. No.427 of 2005<\/p>\n
                            -: 3 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
conducted (Lucky Collections and Lucky Pardah) are a joint<\/p>\n
ventures.\n<\/p>\n
      2.   The Rent Control Court on evaluating the<\/p>\n
evidence adduced by the parties came to the conclusion<\/p>\n
that the eviction ground under Section 11(4)(i) stood<\/p>\n
established.      Such a conclusion was arrived at by the<\/p>\n
learned Rent Control Court mainly on the basis of some<\/p>\n
documents which indicated that a new business by name<\/p>\n
Stylo Footwear is being conducted in a portion of the<\/p>\n
petition schedule building by strangers.       The learned<\/p>\n
Appellate Authority under the impugned judgment reversed<\/p>\n
the findings of the Rent Control Court in the context of the<\/p>\n
ground under Section 11(4)(i). According to the learned<\/p>\n
Appellate Authority the landlord has not discharged his<\/p>\n
burden of showing that the premises have been sub-let and<\/p>\n
that “exclusive possession” has been transferred by the<\/p>\n
tenants to strangers. In that view of the matter the learned<\/p>\n
Appellate Authority set aside the order of eviction and<\/p>\n
R.C.R. No.427 of 2005<\/p>\n
                             -: 4 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
dismissed the RCP.\n<\/p>\n
      3.   In this revision under Section 20 various grounds<\/p>\n
are raised assailing the judgment of the Appellate Authority<\/p>\n
and Sri.C.P.Muhammed Nias, the learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
revision petitioner addressed very strenuous arguments on<\/p>\n
all those grounds. All the submissions of Mr.Niyas were<\/p>\n
resisted by Mr.K.M.Firoz, the learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
respondent.       As the findings entered by the statutory<\/p>\n
authorities are divergent, we have made a survey of the<\/p>\n
entire evidence on record.\n<\/p>\n
      4.   On a reading of the judgment of the Appellate<\/p>\n
Authority, we find that one of the reasons which weighed<\/p>\n
with the learned Appellate Authority for taking a decision<\/p>\n
against landlord’s is that the landlord did not produce a<\/p>\n
particular document written by the 2nd respondent in the<\/p>\n
RCP to Batkal Muslim Juma Ath of which he is a member, in<\/p>\n
which allegedly it was stated that the petition schedule<\/p>\n
building which had been taken on lease by him and his<\/p>\n
R.C.R. No.427 of 2005<\/p>\n
                              -: 5 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
brother (the 1st respondent in the RCP) was sub-let to two<\/p>\n
textile merchants receiving substantial amounts as advance<\/p>\n
cash amount and daily rent of Rs.1700\/- though he claimed<\/p>\n
to be possessing the same. It was submitted by Mr.Nias<\/p>\n
that the landlords filed an application before the Rent<\/p>\n
Control Court for summoning the production of the original<\/p>\n
of that letter from the Juma Ath. But the Secretary of the<\/p>\n
Juma Ath on receiving summons filed a statement to the<\/p>\n
effect that the original of the letter is not traceable.<\/p>\n
Mr.Nias submitted that his client got as a copy of that letter<\/p>\n
(translation of the original version in Urudu). He placed the<\/p>\n
same for our perusal.\n<\/p>\n
      5.   When the contention of Mr.Firoz was drawn by us<\/p>\n
to the evident situation that a footwear business by name<\/p>\n
Stylo Footwear is being conducted in a portion of the<\/p>\n
ground floor of the petition schedule building which is a<\/p>\n
double storeyed building, the learned counsel submitted<\/p>\n
that an order of eviction cannot be passed on the basis of<\/p>\n
R.C.R. No.427 of 2005<\/p>\n
                               -: 6 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
alleged transfer or sub-lease to M\/s.Stylo Footwear as such<\/p>\n
a cause of action does not find a place in the statutory<\/p>\n
intimation notice issued under the proviso to Section 11<\/p>\n
(4)(i) or in the RCP.         The alleged sub-lease to the<\/p>\n
conductors of Stylo Footwear if at all can be a fresh cause<\/p>\n
of action and cannot be a ground for ordering of eviction in<\/p>\n
the present proceedings, according to Mr.Firoz.<\/p>\n
      6.   It is trite and that rules of pleadings are not to be<\/p>\n
meticulously adhered to in rent control proceedings. The<\/p>\n
question to be considered is whether for want of pleadings,<\/p>\n
any prejudice has been caused to the opposite party. On<\/p>\n
going through the rent control petition, what we find is that<\/p>\n
the landlord has alleged that possession of a portion of the<\/p>\n
petition schedule building that possession has been parted<\/p>\n
with by the tenant in favour of strangers. Section 21 of Act<\/p>\n
2 of 1965 provides that any order passed against a tenant<\/p>\n
will be binding on the sub-tenant and that sub-tenant need<\/p>\n
not be made a party to the rent control proceedings in the<\/p>\n
R.C.R. No.427 of 2005<\/p>\n
                             -: 7 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
absence of any allegation for the tenant that there is<\/p>\n
collusion.    In the nature of the pleadings raised in the<\/p>\n
present case the non impleadment of the alleged sub-lease<\/p>\n
cannot be fatal to the rent control proceedings.<\/p>\n
      7.   On a reading of the judgment of the Appellate<\/p>\n
Authority, it appears to us that the learned Appellate<\/p>\n
Authority is of the opinion that in order that eviction ground<\/p>\n
under Section 11(4)(i) is established the landlord has the<\/p>\n
burden to prove that there is sub-lease (the existence of<\/p>\n
landlord-tenant relationship) between the tenant and the<\/p>\n
alleged sub-tenant, apart from the obligation to prove that<\/p>\n
exclusive possession of the building has been transferred by<\/p>\n
the tenant unauthorisedly to the alleged sub-tenant.        A<\/p>\n
careful reading of Section 11(4)(i) will show that in order<\/p>\n
that the ground of eviction under that provision is<\/p>\n
established it is sufficient that either the existence of a<\/p>\n
landlord-tenant relationship between the tenant and sub-<\/p>\n
tenant is established or unauthorised transfer of either the<\/p>\n
R.C.R. No.427 of 2005<\/p>\n
                             -: 8 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
entire building or a portion of a building is established. One<\/p>\n
of the circumstances relied on by the learned Rent Control<\/p>\n
Court for its conclusion that Stylo Footwear is being<\/p>\n
conducted in a portion of the building by strangers, was<\/p>\n
Ext.A11 letter, paper containing the telephone numbers of<\/p>\n
total strangers.     The learned Appellate Authority also<\/p>\n
noticed Ext.A11. According to that Authority it will not be<\/p>\n
safe to conclude on the basis of Ext.A11 alone that<\/p>\n
strangers are in possession.\n<\/p>\n
      8.   Having made a thorough reappraisal of the<\/p>\n
evidence and the pleadings we feel that the question<\/p>\n
whether the eviction order is liable to be passed against the<\/p>\n
respondent in this case under Section 11(4)(i) requires to be<\/p>\n
considered afresh by the Rent Control Court.               The<\/p>\n
commencement of Stylo Footwear is an event subsequent to<\/p>\n
the initiation of the rent control proceedings.        If Stylo<\/p>\n
Footwear is being conducted by anybody other than the<\/p>\n
respondents in the RCP the same will definitely amount to a<\/p>\n
R.C.R. No.427 of 2005<\/p>\n
                              -: 9 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
ground for eviction order under Section 11(4)(i) as the<\/p>\n
respondent did not have a case that it is with authorisation<\/p>\n
from the landlord that Stylo Footwear is being conducted.<\/p>\n
As rightly argued by Mr.Firoz the conduct of Stylo Footwear<\/p>\n
in a portion of the building is not averred in the rent control<\/p>\n
proceedings. We feel that as the matter is going back to the<\/p>\n
Rent Control Court the landlord should be permitted to<\/p>\n
amend their pleadings. We are therefore inclined to remit<\/p>\n
the matter back to the Rent Control Court giving<\/p>\n
opportunity to the landlord to amend the pleadings and<\/p>\n
giving opportunity to both sides to adduce further evidence<\/p>\n
including production of the copy of the letter sent by 2nd<\/p>\n
respondent in the RCP to the Batkal Juma Ath.<\/p>\n
      9.   We notice another important aspect of the matter.<\/p>\n
The building having a plinth area of 3000 sq.feet on<\/p>\n
S.M.Street at Calicut is fetching to the landlord only a<\/p>\n
paltry rent of Rs.2,000\/- per mensem. According to us if the<\/p>\n
building is let out today, the same will fetch several times<\/p>\n
R.C.R. No.427 of 2005<\/p>\n
                             -: 10 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
the above amount. If the allegation of sub-lease or transfer<\/p>\n
is true, the tenant must be receiving substantial amounts<\/p>\n
from the alleged sub-lease. We are therefore, inclined to<\/p>\n
refix the rent with effect from 1.3.2011 at Rs.10,000\/- per<\/p>\n
mensem. Such refixation will be tentative and it will open<\/p>\n
to either party to move to Rent Control Court for regular<\/p>\n
fixation of fair rent under Section 5. Till the fair rent is<\/p>\n
fixed, respondents shall pay rent at the rate of Rs.10,000\/-<\/p>\n
per mensem.        The result of the above discussion is as<\/p>\n
follows:-\n<\/p>\n
           The judgment of the Rent Control Appellate<\/p>\n
Authority and order of the Rent Control Court are set aside<\/p>\n
to the extent the same pertains to eviction on the ground of<\/p>\n
sub-letting under Section 11(4)(i). The RCP is remitted to<\/p>\n
the Rent Control Court. That Court is directed to permit the<\/p>\n
landlord to amend the pleadings by incorporating specific<\/p>\n
averments regarding the nature of the sub-lease or transfer.<\/p>\n
If pleadings are amended by the landlords, tenants should<\/p>\n
R.C.R. No.427 of 2005<\/p>\n
                           -: 11 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
be given opportunity to raise counter pleadings. Both sides<\/p>\n
should be permitted to adduce further evidence. It is open<\/p>\n
to the landlord to produce a copy of the letter issued by the<\/p>\n
2nd respondent to the Batkal Juma Ath as an item of<\/p>\n
evidence on their side. The learned Rent Control Court will<\/p>\n
take a fresh decision on the basis of the evidence on record<\/p>\n
and the evidence which may come on record at the earliest.<\/p>\n
As the RCP is of the year 1999, the learned Rent Control<\/p>\n
Court is directed to expedite matters and ensure that fresh<\/p>\n
orders are passed atleast within the statutory time frame of<\/p>\n
four months. Parties will enter appearance before the Rent<\/p>\n
Control Court on 28.2.2011.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                   PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,
\n                                                   JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
                                   N.K.BALAKRISHNAN,
\n                                                    JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
Jvt<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Shabandri Real Estate Limited vs S.K.Syed Ummar Sahib on 4 February, 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RCRev..No. 427 of 2005() 1. SHABANDRI REAL ESTATE LIMITED, A … Petitioner Vs 1. S.K.SYED UMMAR SAHIB, S\/O.LATE S.K.SYED … Respondent 2. S.K.SYED HUSSAIN, S\/O.S.K.HUSSAIN For Petitioner :SRI.C.P.MOHAMMED NIAS For Respondent :SRI.K.M.FIROZ […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-72445","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nShabandri Real Estate Limited vs S.K.Syed Ummar Sahib on 4 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shabandri Real Estate Limited vs S.K.Syed Ummar Sahib on 4 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-02-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-01-28T13:46:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shabandri Real Estate Limited vs S.K.Syed Ummar Sahib on 4 February, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-02-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-28T13:46:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1865,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011\",\"name\":\"Shabandri Real Estate Limited vs S.K.Syed Ummar Sahib on 4 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-02-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-28T13:46:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shabandri Real Estate Limited vs S.K.Syed Ummar Sahib on 4 February, 2011\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Shabandri Real Estate Limited vs S.K.Syed Ummar Sahib on 4 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shabandri Real Estate Limited vs S.K.Syed Ummar Sahib on 4 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-02-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-01-28T13:46:36+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shabandri Real Estate Limited vs S.K.Syed Ummar Sahib on 4 February, 2011","datePublished":"2011-02-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-28T13:46:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011"},"wordCount":1865,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011","name":"Shabandri Real Estate Limited vs S.K.Syed Ummar Sahib on 4 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-02-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-28T13:46:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shabandri-real-estate-limited-vs-s-k-syed-ummar-sahib-on-4-february-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shabandri Real Estate Limited vs S.K.Syed Ummar Sahib on 4 February, 2011"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72445","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=72445"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72445\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=72445"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=72445"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=72445"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}