{"id":100570,"date":"2010-12-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-12-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010"},"modified":"2016-11-08T08:28:54","modified_gmt":"2016-11-08T02:58:54","slug":"ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010","title":{"rendered":"M\/S. Genfocus Infotech (I)Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 6 December, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M\/S. Genfocus Infotech (I)Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 6 December, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 33458 of 2009(B)\n\n\n1. M\/S. GENFOCUS INFOTECH (I)LTD., IA,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTE BY THE\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM.\n\n3. INFOPARK KERALA, THAPASYA,\n\n4. KINFRA EXPORT PROMOTION INDUSTRIAL\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL)\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.P.A.AHAMED, SC, INFOPARKS\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice P.S.GOPINATHAN\n\n Dated :06\/12\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n               PIUS C. KURIAKOSE &amp;\n               P. S. GOPINATHAN, JJ.\n    ------------------------------------------------\n            W. P. C. No.33458 of 2009\n    ------------------------------------------------\n    Dated this the 6th day of December, 2010\n\n                    JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>Pius C. Kuriakose, J<\/p>\n<p>       Under challenge in this Writ Petition filed<\/p>\n<p>under Article 226 is Ext.P32 order passed by the<\/p>\n<p>District Collector interfering with Ext.P30 order<\/p>\n<p>passed by the Accommodation Controller under<\/p>\n<p>Section 13 of Act 2 of 1965. It is conceded that<\/p>\n<p>the status of the petitioner\/company is that of a<\/p>\n<p>tenant and that its landlord in respect of the<\/p>\n<p>premises in question is the third respondent,<\/p>\n<p>another company M\/s Infopark Kerala. It is also<\/p>\n<p>evident that the contract rent payable by the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner to the third respondent has been<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">W. P. C. No.33458 of 2009       -2-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>      defaulted. It is further evident that the charges for<\/p>\n<p>      the electricity consumed by the petitioner also<\/p>\n<p>      have been defaulted. The defence of the third<\/p>\n<p>      respondent to Ext.P27 petition filed by the<\/p>\n<p>      petitioner before the Accommodation Controller<\/p>\n<p>      seeking a direction for restoration of the electricity<\/p>\n<p>      supply was that such a direction is not liable to be<\/p>\n<p>      passed as rent is heavily in arrears and as<\/p>\n<p>      electricity charges are also in arrears. The<\/p>\n<p>      Accommodation Controller allowed Ext.P27 by<\/p>\n<p>      passing Ext.P30 order. Ext.P30 order turns more<\/p>\n<p>      on     considerations  of   indulgence   than   legal<\/p>\n<p>      considerations. The Accommodation Controller<\/p>\n<p>      was of the view that it was not at all fair to allow<\/p>\n<p>      an institution where 40 employees are working to<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">W. P. C. No.33458 of 2009       -3-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>      be compulsorily closed &#8220;merely on the complaint<\/p>\n<p>      of non-payment of rent and electricity charges&#8221;.<\/p>\n<p>      Accordingly, Accommodation Controller directed<\/p>\n<p>      immediate restoration of the supply on condition<\/p>\n<p>      that arrears of electricity charges as per the<\/p>\n<p>      contract shall be deposited by the petitioner in not<\/p>\n<p>      less than four instalments. As regards the dispute<\/p>\n<p>      regarding payment of arrears of rent, the parties<\/p>\n<p>      were relegated to the Rent Control Court. The<\/p>\n<p>      District Collector under Ext.P32 interfered with<\/p>\n<p>      Ext.P30      and   vacated   Ext.P30. The   District<\/p>\n<p>      Collector under Ext.P32 has directed the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>      to approach M\/s Kinfra, the 4th respondent in this<\/p>\n<p>      Writ Petition for getting independent connection.<\/p>\n<p>      As regards the dispute regarding the rent actually<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">W. P. C. No.33458 of 2009         -4-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>      payable, the District Collector also endorsed the<\/p>\n<p>      view of the Accommodation Controller that the<\/p>\n<p>      aggrieved party will have to seek relief from the<\/p>\n<p>      Rent Control Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>             2. In this Writ Petition various grounds have<\/p>\n<p>      been raised assailing Ext.P32. We have heard<\/p>\n<p>      submissions of the learned counsel for the revision<\/p>\n<p>      petitioner,     Sri.A.R.Dileep  and   those   of   the<\/p>\n<p>      Advocate representing the Standing Counsel for<\/p>\n<p>      the third respondent. The question is whether<\/p>\n<p>      Ext.P32 is liable to be interfered with. It is clear to<\/p>\n<p>      our mind that the question has to be answered in<\/p>\n<p>      the negative. The issue as to what is the rent<\/p>\n<p>      actually in arrears and as to what is the contract<\/p>\n<p>      rent and as to whether the rent claimed by the<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">W. P. C. No.33458 of 2009      -5-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>      third respondent is reasonable, all are issues<\/p>\n<p>      which should be settled by the local Rent Control<\/p>\n<p>      Court. It is not disputed that charges for the<\/p>\n<p>      power actually consumed by the petitioner has<\/p>\n<p>      been kept in arrears by the petitioner. So long as<\/p>\n<p>      power charges are kept in arrears, the insistence<\/p>\n<p>      of the petitioner\/tenant that the supply should be<\/p>\n<p>      restored is not justified. In that view of the<\/p>\n<p>      matter, we do not find infirmity with Ext.P32. We<\/p>\n<p>      decline to interfere with Ext.P32. We reiterate that<\/p>\n<p>      it is open to the petitioner to move M\/s Kinfra for<\/p>\n<p>      separate connection in the petitioner&#8217;s own name.<\/p>\n<p>      If any application in that regard is received by the<\/p>\n<p>      4th respondent, the 4th respondent will take a<\/p>\n<p>      decision on that application in accordance with the<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">W. P. C. No.33458 of 2009     -6-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>      normal procedure. It is submitted before us on<\/p>\n<p>      behalf of the third respondent that the third<\/p>\n<p>      respondent will not raise any objection in the<\/p>\n<p>      matter provided the current charges due and rent<\/p>\n<p>      in arrears as of now are cleared. We record the<\/p>\n<p>      above submission and direct the third respondent<\/p>\n<p>      to issue the required no objection letter from their<\/p>\n<p>      part once the power charges are discharged in<\/p>\n<p>      full. As regards the recovery of rent arrears both<\/p>\n<p>      sides are permitted to approach the Rent Control<\/p>\n<p>      Court for the needed relief. Though we have<\/p>\n<p>      declined jurisdiction, we are inclined to continue<\/p>\n<p>      the interim order which we passed in this case on<\/p>\n<p>      08\/04\/10 for a period of three more months from<\/p>\n<p>      today on condition that the petitioner pays to the<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">W. P. C. No.33458 of 2009    -7-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>      third respondent a further amount of Rs.3 lakhs<\/p>\n<p>      within one month from today towards the rent<\/p>\n<p>      dues.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>                                  PIUS C. KURIAKOSE<br \/>\n                                              JUDGE<\/p>\n<p>                                   P. S. GOPINATHAN<br \/>\n                                              JUDGE<br \/>\n      kns\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court M\/S. Genfocus Infotech (I)Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 6 December, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 33458 of 2009(B) 1. M\/S. GENFOCUS INFOTECH (I)LTD., IA, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTE BY THE &#8230; Respondent 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 3. INFOPARK KERALA, THAPASYA, 4. [&hellip;]<\/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-100570","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>M\/S. Genfocus Infotech (I)Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 6 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S. Genfocus Infotech (I)Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 6 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-12-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-08T02:58:54+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=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S. Genfocus Infotech (I)Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 6 December, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-08T02:58:54+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010\"},\"wordCount\":797,\"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\\\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S. Genfocus Infotech (I)Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 6 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-08T02:58:54+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S. Genfocus Infotech (I)Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 6 December, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"M\/S. Genfocus Infotech (I)Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 6 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S. Genfocus Infotech (I)Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 6 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-12-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-08T02:58:54+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S. Genfocus Infotech (I)Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 6 December, 2010","datePublished":"2010-12-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-08T02:58:54+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010"},"wordCount":797,"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\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010","name":"M\/S. Genfocus Infotech (I)Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 6 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-12-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-08T02:58:54+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-genfocus-infotech-iltd-vs-state-of-kerala-on-6-december-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S. Genfocus Infotech (I)Ltd. vs State Of Kerala on 6 December, 2010"}]},{"@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\/100570","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=100570"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/100570\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=100570"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=100570"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=100570"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}