KCC 750/2014

The initial dispute involved a request for eviction and unpaid rent. It was stated the case had been filed against an irrelevant party. Although, the property have been purchased by a new owner he had not informed the second defendant that he did not wish to renew the tenancy agreement so it automatically renewed for an additional year.

Background

A company filed a case against a defendant and requested the court to order the defendant to vacate a disputed property and pay late rent.

A second defendant requested the court to reject the case because it had been filed against an irrelevant party.

The first defendant filed a case against the company and requested the court to dismiss the tenancy agreement issued by the company and to approve an agreement issued by the second defendant.

The court rejected the first case and ruled that the tenancy agreement should be dismissed and approved the tenancy agreement issued by the second defendant.

The company appealed the ruling before the court of appeal. The court upheld the appealed ruling.

Decision