{"id":101378,"date":"2009-04-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-04-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009"},"modified":"2018-08-25T21:46:07","modified_gmt":"2018-08-25T16:16:07","slug":"k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009","title":{"rendered":"K Keshava Kumar vs G K Umashankar on 22 April, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
K Keshava Kumar vs G K Umashankar on 22 April, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: Arali Nagaraj<\/div>\n
1 CRLKA. ?\u00abf38I20{}3\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BIKNGALQREE\nDATEE) THES THE 22\"\" SAY OF A?RIL 2009\nBEFORE '\n\nTHE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ARALZ  '%;_ \n\nCRL.A. HO. 74-8 01''' 2003\nBETWEEH\n\nSri. K.Keshava Kumar,\n\nS\/0. Sri. \u00bb.}ayaram Raddy,\n\nAged about 40 years,\n\nResiding at No. 1578,\n\n5*-h cross 'E' Block,\n\nRajajinagar, 3    '4 V \nBangaiore-560 010 .;;. .% _   g   x *  APPELLANT.\n\nAND:\n\n, _ Sri. .Q;.K. Umasha:11;ar,\u00e9,\n . V \" 'S [ oV'.'L{':c5pa1a1\u00a7ziSHan,\n Majar, Re$id\u00a2f:t.__at No. 9,\nA '-\u00a3}V0i_{11}\"  Kempana Lane,\n\nC;T.\u20ac-Mreet -Grass,\n\n  Banga1ore\u00bb5\u20acso 002.  RESPONDENT<\/pre>\n
T (Ey…A\u20acV3I*i:H.N.Si1asI3idhar for Kesvy & ()0. Adv.)<\/p>\n
 ‘  3<;*2:;1s Crl. Appeal \ufb01led u\/s. 378(4) Cr.P.C. prayi\ufb01g<\/p>\n
togrevcrse the order datccl 24.02.2903 passed by the<\/p>\n
–I>{-‘Jth Acid}. C.M.M. Bangalore in C.C.No.21612\/98,<\/p>\n
 V  acquitt\u00e9ng the mspondsntwaccuscd fer the offence
\n” P\/U\/S. 138 of the N.i.Act.\n<\/p>\n
“””‘r”v-“WK.—-u<\/p>\n
2 C3,:-,;;\\_.:4a:2oo3<\/p>\n
JUDGMENT , C7 <\/p>\n
The complainant in CCA1NaJ2 }it:3i~2f9″8-I631’v1:,\u00a7:;:.,\u00a7I%iie  <\/p>\n
the lcaxngd 15\u00a2 ACM’M._,_  gaixgam 1
\n[hereinafter referred to    short] has
\nchallenged the   of Hatgqtlittal dated
\n24.2.2003 a}_:)vas:-mid”  acquitting the
\n under Section 138
\nof _1;h1\u00e9:    Act [hereirlafter referred<\/p>\n
 ” I_h\u00e9u_I\u00e9   the arguments of Sri Ramaswamy,<\/p>\n
  Cv.(\u00a7tiI1S\u00a7:_]_._’f;)\u00a3’ the appellant -~ complainant and Sri<\/p>\n
 .,  learned counsel for the respondent —<\/p>\n
”   perusctd the impugzed judgment and crder<\/p>\n
 ‘c;f  and also the entire material on the original<\/p>\n
2 ”  VT ‘rec\u00e9nrds obtained from the Triai Court.<\/p>\n
3. The case of the complainant [hereinafter, the<\/p>\n
parties are referred to as per their ranks in the Trial
\nr <\/p>\n
5 CRL;%.:748f20\ufb013<\/p>\n
5. The ieazmed counsel for the appenaxjm<\/p>\n
contended that the Trial Court committegi <\/p>\n
in acqxlitting the accused on   ; a<\/p>\n
notice in respect of dishonoufof
\nwas not served on him.   the
\nTrial Court committee   Ahel\u00e9itilg that the
\ncomplainant had no  said amount to<\/p>\n
the accusevsiqdespitef the  \u00a3101; disputing his<\/p>\n
sigigature He further urged that the
\nTrial  raised the presumption under<\/p>\n
 139- ‘  NI Act and thereby held that the<\/p>\n
 f  to prove his defence that the said cheque<\/p>\n
 2 ._  by him towards discharge of legally<\/p>\n
e nfoir9ei9[o1e debt but the same was gven to one<\/p>\n
 .. AA ‘(–.-“ian\u00e9adhar, the employer of the accused.<\/p>\n
6. Per contra, the ieamed counsel for the<\/p>\n
respondent accused strongly contended that no<\/p>\n
acceptabie material is produced on recerd by the<\/p>\n
r’–J”‘—“‘\\…..-.\/<\/p>\n
5 cmg\ufb01awzws<\/p>\n
complainant to substantiate his aHegg\u00a5,stiot1.: as\u00bb  <\/p>\n
compiaint that he issued the” statutory ftioticeetdagttedt  AV <\/p>\n
10.8. 1988 to the accused aitd,  lattet
\nsame on 14.8.1988 V.\n<\/p>\n
complainant along   sndvvtsought for
\n15 days time for   ittfte amount under
\nthe said     that the
\n  titxder one Gangadhar on a<\/p>\n
motiti\ufb01jf s.t\u00a7151;gz’y;;io1″  only could not have the<\/p>\n
capetcit$z’\u00abto 1e:[;;\u20aci\u00bb’:.jVt.toe’s:s.ici’*11eavy amount of Rs.3 lakhs as<\/p>\n
ailegeei   theeompiaint. He aiso contended that<\/p>\n
. V’   itis state\u00e9itirl vague terms in the complaint that<\/p>\n
     lent the said amount; about two years<\/p>\n
Apr_iorV___vte.;S’.$.1998 he has not produced any acceptable<\/p>\n
 AA taatertal on record to substantiate that he actually ient<\/p>\n
A’  the said amount to the accused on any specific date.<\/p>\n
While contending so, he further submitted that the<\/p>\n
complainant failed to discharge the  burden of<\/p>\n
proving the existence of the legally enforceable debt as<\/p>\n
f”%%_ <\/p>\n
7 CRL.A.?48f20G3<\/p>\n
on the date of the cheque in question. And as aiich, the<\/p>\n
Trial Court was quite justi\ufb01ed in acqmtm1g..theV.a_e:z1eed.<\/p>\n
T. On careful readirlgeof the ;a\\?er’etjeeteV  . <\/p>\n
complaint, it couid be seen *as:’to\u00b0   ‘<\/p>\n
statratory notice, the avehaietats of ttieu are
\nat para No.7 of t11e_.co11:1p1ai?i:t,-.\\#;r;’a_ez’eiIi’it.is.–atated that
\nthe complainant was  the 1%! notice<\/p>\n
dated 10.8._19\u00a78_ isggiied’   ca1’Ii1}g upon him<\/p>\n
to repay.’  amount under the said cheque,
\nas retiiaited   01′ the NI Act and the<\/p>\n
said :1otiee”w:_a;”sj’ seat to the accused through RPAD and<\/p>\n
 ~t.az;d;%\u00a7\u20act&pera1icate of posang on 12.8.1998 and also sent
\n ceurier service on 13.8.1998. It is further<\/p>\n
up’<\/p>\n
aveneci  para _No.8 therein that the said notice was<\/p>\n
 * served. en the accused on 14.8.1998 and therefore, on<\/p>\n
  said date, he approached the complainant along<\/p>\n
 with the said notice and requested him to yam’: time for<\/p>\n
8 CRL.A.’.?48\/2093
\n15 days for making payment of the entire amount under<\/p>\n
the said cheque.\n<\/p>\n
8. The compiainant: has stated in   <\/p>\n
FWI, that a legal nctice datccfif cc1o.3.\u00a7%1\u00a79s%c ViV:s8’iue\u00e9i..\u00abtc’ u  <\/p>\n
the accused an\u00e9 the same  1
\nRPM) and it was serve-Vd  the’
\nsaid notice the accfugcd    of the
\ncheque anti thcrcfcrc-,-‘  \ufb01led the said<\/p>\n
cor\ufb01plaiht;  deposed in his examination\u00bb<\/p>\n
in–cI1ic:t’\u00ab–.giateci  that $2.133 is the copy of the<\/p>\n
 __j r:awfl;ice,”  is the ccurier receipt, n’.x.P5 is the<\/p>\n
‘  jpa\ufb01taj\ufb01clgriowlcdgemcnt and Ex.P6 is the certificate of<\/p>\n
.7 ‘j_ Vhis further examination-in-chief I’6COI’df’:d on<\/p>\n
data. 11.9.2001, this PW1 csmpiaixmnt has stated that<\/p>\n
” ,   notice was sent to the accused before the cheque<\/p>\n
 was rammed by the Bank cg\ufb01fer its dishoncmr and Ex.P7<\/p>\n
notice was sent to him after the cheque was returned by<\/p>\n
the Bank.\n<\/p>\n
9 CRL.A’.”‘.?\u00a7r8f2(X33<\/p>\n
9. From the above evidence of the  4_<\/p>\n
is clear that Ex.P4 eo’u1’ier”” receigit, ; <\/p>\n
\nacknowledgement and
\npertains to issue of    to
\nthe complainant,  L. ‘eariier to the
\npresenting of cheque  Bank and E}{.P7
\nis the copy tine  to the accused
\nafter the    bounced. But the
\n   any further material to
\nshots  %.  sent to the accused either<\/p>\n
 ..orA’urV1A\u00e9i.er Certificate of Posting or Courier<\/p>\n
 .._On fi’ie ot11er hand, PW1 complainant has<\/p>\n
   cross examination that except Ex.P3<\/p>\n
A notigte,  not send to the accused any other notice.<\/p>\n
 AA ; so, the Trial Court has rightly recorded its<\/p>\n
V’  that the complainant failed to establish the fact<\/p>\n
 that the statutory notice was served on the accused as<\/p>\n
averred by him in his complaint.\n<\/p>\n
r~…….\/”””””\u00a5*”‘\\_,,.\u00bb-\n<\/p>\n
I 1 CRL.A.’?48f2003<\/p>\n
the ‘Trial Court has rightiy held in the iz:q_pug1ed<\/p>\n
judment that the eompiainant had me:  <\/p>\n
capacity to lend the said heavy amount ei’ <\/p>\n
the accused. As laid dewnv.:by.the  1. <\/p>\n
Court in the ease of   ”\n<\/p>\n
Dattatraya G. Hegde   “swam
\nCOURT 1325 -.= 2003(5)  “i’-he pfesmn\ufb01tion under<\/p>\n
Section 139 of V% Ni ”   extent to the<\/p>\n
exis\u00a7ten_c_eA’ enforceable debt as on the date
\nof the ._eheqi1e,;V %ei11\ufb01_4i”\u00e9._’:Le3iiends only to the fact that the<\/p>\n
e3;1eq11e eras, _iS’s’i1et3. by the accused to the complainant<\/p>\n
   “discharge of legaliy enforeiable debt and<\/p>\n
 ._  factum of existence of such debt is to be<\/p>\n
  the compiahmnt beyond reasonable doubt as<\/p>\n
 * se fae\ufb01; On careful reaiiing of the evidence of WV 1, it is<\/p>\n
 “Clear that the complainant failed to preve the existence<\/p>\n
T of the legaliy enforceaable debt as on the date of the<\/p>\n
cheque in question.\n<\/p>\n
r____{‘\\….—–“\\.?\n<\/p>\n
12 CRL.A.748J2{}f)3<\/p>\n
1 1. The defence of the accused is :’<\/p>\n
dealm’ gs with one Gangadhar, and ‘d <\/p>\n
given sig1ed hiank cheques  <3,    ; <\/p>\n
\nGangadhar misused one of ‘die
\nme complainant, who    m
\ncomplainant has ad.;p.itted”‘\u00a7di_:s.evide\ufb01ce  he has
\nbeen serving     and he<\/p>\n
(Gangadhar\ufb01had   case against the<\/p>\n
accused.  resgsect’-oi’–an’other”eheque said to have been<\/p>\n
issded ‘hzi V_f<)'1' a sum of Rs.23 lakhs.<\/p>\n
 $.12.'  .,  ed counsel for the appellant<\/p>\n
'V 'A   " an t steongly contended that the accused did<\/p>\n
 ._  get the said Gangadhar examined to<\/p>\n
's11bs\u00a7:s11'tiate his defence that the said cheque was given<\/p>\n
 " \u00ab\u00a39  without fail)" 'mg the blanks and the said<\/p>\n
 "Gsngadhar misused the same through the complainant.<\/p>\n
T In View of the undisputed fact that the complainant had<\/p>\n
been working under the said Crangadhar since the past<\/p>\n
(…..___,_,-Z'—–'-xat<\/p>\n
13 CRL.A.'T48.?'2GG3<\/p>\n
18 to 20 years, it was easy for the  'trfget '_<\/p>\n
him (Gangadhar) examined for  ; x <\/p>\n
net receive any blank signed   ~.+:.he <\/p>\n
and the cheque in questio11:.i;vas eot.give1_*1, 4h im'" ' by the
\nsaid Gangadhar. .   the feferred to<\/p>\n
supra, the Hoifble  CotiijI:e t:.as iaid down at<\/p>\n
para 23 as <\/p>\n
_V   \ufb01fe'  the burden of
\n "    \ufb01imilnder a statute need not\n<\/p>\n
 -He’ may discharge his burden on<\/p>\n
 t:h4e-  V\ufb01materials already brought on<\/p>\n
— .. LA  -‘An “aeeused has a constitutional right to<\/p>\n
  Standard of proof on the part of
\nw.a;1.4v:”accueed and that of the prosecution 111 a<\/p>\n
TA  case is different.”\n<\/p>\n
It’ie__ furti’1er laid down in the said decision at para 25<\/p>\n
H * .b_f<.'A1.AT1E':ti',:\n<\/p>\n
“if the complainant has to prove his case beyond<\/p>\n
reasonahie doubt, the accused couid not be
\nrequired to prove his defence with the eame<\/p>\n
‘?”\n<\/p>\n
14 CRL.A.’?48\/2903
\ndegree, but it is su\ufb01icient if he proves l”1iS ‘fi’!3ft3I”1Ct3<\/p>\n
version by preponderance of probabiiiititti\u00e9; <\/p>\n
13. in View of the fact: that the \u00a3:1ici* <\/p>\n
not have capacity to lend thekiccs .;  i  AV<\/p>\n
amount and the complainant  \u00a5.:o e\ufb01tab\ufb01vsh ‘9\u00a3:’}. 1&e’1t: i*1:=,rL<\/p>\n
ient the said amount on   of
\nyear, “due defence :.f\u00a2r$ioI\u00a7’V’\u00a7$i”‘  he had
\ngiven blank signed cheE;_j_J<\u00a7 't\u00a33'Vtt1e Zsi\u00e9j;:i__"Gangacihar, who<\/p>\n
is n\u00e9xze 'employer of the conzpiaiilant, and
\nthe   the same through the<\/p>\n
"  to be plausible and acceptable.<\/p>\n
\u00bb' version is further strengthened by the fact<\/p>\n
 '– \ufb01zat  Gangadhar had filed a case against the<\/p>\n
 \u00e9tlleging that the accused had given him' a<\/p>\n
"   Chgq\ufb01e for RS323 lakhs and same came to be<\/p>\n
'' E compromised.\n<\/p>\n
14. For the reasons aforesaid, I do not \ufb01nd any<\/p>\n
reasons to take a dgferent view than the one taken by<\/p>\n
(‘–…._\/”””-~\u00ab-….—“‘~…….–v’<\/p>\n
15 CRL,R.7=%\u00a7i2GO3<\/p>\n
the Trial Court and therefore, the   <\/p>\n
deserves to be dismissed as  b\u00e9ir\u00a2g\u00ab ae%m\ufb01[jq,+- <\/p>\n
Aocoriiingly, it is dismisseci, _No (331163 as t\ufb01iii\ufb01sts; <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court K Keshava Kumar vs G K Umashankar on 22 April, 2009 Author: Arali Nagaraj 1 CRLKA. ?\u00abf38I20{}3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BIKNGALQREE DATEE) THES THE 22″” SAY OF A?RIL 2009 BEFORE ‘ THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ARALZ ‘%;_ CRL.A. HO. 74-8 01”’ 2003 BETWEEH Sri. K.Keshava Kumar, S\/0. Sri. \u00bb.}ayaram […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-101378","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nK Keshava Kumar vs G K Umashankar on 22 April, 2009 - 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\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"K Keshava Kumar vs G K Umashankar on 22 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-04-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-25T16:16:07+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"K Keshava Kumar vs G K Umashankar on 22 April, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-25T16:16:07+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1587,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009\",\"name\":\"K Keshava Kumar vs G K Umashankar on 22 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-25T16:16:07+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"K Keshava Kumar vs G K Umashankar on 22 April, 2009\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"K Keshava Kumar vs G K Umashankar on 22 April, 2009 - 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\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"K Keshava Kumar vs G K Umashankar on 22 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-04-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-25T16:16:07+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"K Keshava Kumar vs G K Umashankar on 22 April, 2009","datePublished":"2009-04-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-25T16:16:07+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009"},"wordCount":1587,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009","name":"K Keshava Kumar vs G K Umashankar on 22 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-04-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-25T16:16:07+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-keshava-kumar-vs-g-k-umashankar-on-22-april-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"K Keshava Kumar vs G K Umashankar on 22 April, 2009"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/101378","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=101378"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101378\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=101378"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=101378"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=101378"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}