Mohamed Ismail and Two Others v. Hussain and Others – sllr 1993 volume 2 page 380

In the case between Mohamed Ismail and two others (Plaintiffs) and Hussain and others (Defendants), the court addressed whether premises used predominantly as a family residence and partially for a tea kiosk qualified as a “house” or “residential premises” under the Ceiling on Housing Property Law No. 1 of 1973. The court held that the dominant character of the premises was residential, with the minor commercial use insufficient to alter this status. The court further determined that the statutory requirements concerning the vesting order, including procedural fairness and natural justice, had been met. Accordingly, the appellate decision quashing the vesting order was set aside, reaffirming that properties with incidental or minor commercial use do not lose their residential character und