{"id":102993,"date":"2010-07-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-07-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010"},"modified":"2014-12-20T22:35:22","modified_gmt":"2014-12-20T17:05:22","slug":"k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010","title":{"rendered":"K.Somon vs Kulathoor Panchayat on 30 July, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
K.Somon vs Kulathoor Panchayat on 30 July, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nSA.No. 872 of 1996()\n\n\n\n1. K.SOMON\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. KULATHOOR PANCHAYAT\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.SREEDHARAN NAIR\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID\n\n Dated :30\/07\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                     HARUN-UL-RASHID, J.\n                       ------------------------\n                       S.A.No.872 Of 1996\n                        ----------------------\n              Dated this the 30th day of July, 2010.\n\n                          J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
     The defendant in O.S.No.738 of 1991 on the file of the I<\/p>\n
Additional Munsiff Court, Neyyattinkara, is the appellant.    The<\/p>\n
appeal is directed against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.138<\/p>\n
of 1994 of the Sub Court, Neyyattinkara. The suit was filed by<\/p>\n
the Kulathur Panchayath for damages. The trial court dismissed<\/p>\n
the suit and allowed the counter claim. The lower appellate court<\/p>\n
set aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial court and<\/p>\n
decreed the suit and dismissed the counter claim.           Parties<\/p>\n
hereinafter are referred to as the plaintiff and defendant as<\/p>\n
arrayed in the suit.\n<\/p>\n
     2.    The plaintiff is the Kulathur Panchayath. Panchayath<\/p>\n
auctioned the right to remove the sand from AVM canal for the<\/p>\n
period 1990-91. The auction was conducted on 12.3.1990. The<\/p>\n
defendant bid in auction the right to collect sand for an amount of<\/p>\n
Rs.48,200\/-.    Bid was confirmed on 15.3.1990. The defendant<\/p>\n
executed an agreement on 19.3.1990 pursuant to confirmation of<\/p>\n
the bid. The terms in the agreement directs the defendant to<\/p>\n
S.A.No.872 Of 1996<\/p>\n
                                 ::2::\n<\/p>\n
deposit 1\/3 of the bid amount on 19.3.1990 and the balance 2\/3<\/p>\n
to be paid on or before 15.6.1990 and 15.9.1990 in two equal<\/p>\n
instalments. In violation of the provisions of the agreement it is<\/p>\n
alleged that the defendant failed to produce the solvency<\/p>\n
certificate and failed to remit the balance 2\/3 of the bid amount.<\/p>\n
The plaintiff’s case is that the terms in the agreement empowers<\/p>\n
the plaintiff to cancel the auction and to re-auction the right if the<\/p>\n
defendant violates the terms in the agreement and to realise the<\/p>\n
loss if any sustained in the re-auction. The plaintiff issued notice<\/p>\n
on 27.7.1990 demanding the balance amount due and directing<\/p>\n
to produce the solvency certificate. It is stated that no reply was<\/p>\n
sent by the defendant. Therefore another notice was issued on<\/p>\n
22.8.1990.     In that notice the defendant was asked to show<\/p>\n
cause why re-auction shall not be conducted at the risk and cost<\/p>\n
of the defendant. The defendant did not care to show cause and<\/p>\n
failed to reply to the said notice as well. Therefore, the plaintiff<\/p>\n
Panchayath decided to cancel the agreement and to re-auction<\/p>\n
the right to collect the sand. It is further stated by the plaintiff<\/p>\n
that re-auction was conducted on 18.9.1990. The bid amount on<\/p>\n
re-auction is Rs.20,670\/- and due to the re-auction plaintiff<\/p>\n
S.A.No.872 Of 1996<\/p>\n
                                ::3::\n<\/p>\n
sustained a loss of Rs.11,463\/-. Hence the suit was filed for<\/p>\n
realisation of the said amount with interest at the rate of 12%.<\/p>\n
      3.   In the written statement filed by the defendant the<\/p>\n
execution of the agreement and proceedings of auction are<\/p>\n
admitted.    It is contended inter alia that the defendant was<\/p>\n
unable to remove sand due to various reasons. On 5.4.1990 one<\/p>\n
person filed O.S.No.536 of 1990 and obtained injunction against<\/p>\n
the   defendant    and    on  31.5.1990,    another    person  filed<\/p>\n
O.S.No.705 of 1990 and he also obtained injunction against the<\/p>\n
defendant. On the basis of these two orders passed by the civil<\/p>\n
court it is averred that the Panchayath had also informed the<\/p>\n
defendant not to remove sand.        In these circumstances, it is<\/p>\n
contended that the agreement has become impossible for<\/p>\n
performance, that the order of injunction restrained the<\/p>\n
defendant from collecting sand, thereby the agreement has<\/p>\n
become void and therefore the plaintiff is not entitled to realise<\/p>\n
the amount based on the void agreement. The defendant raised<\/p>\n
a counter claim seeking realisation of Rs.15,000\/- and interest<\/p>\n
stating that the plaintiff Panchayath is liable to return the money<\/p>\n
deposited by the defendant with the plaintiff on 19.3.1990.<\/p>\n
S.A.No.872 Of 1996<\/p>\n
                                 ::4::\n<\/p>\n
     4.     The agreement was executed between the parties.<\/p>\n
Ext.A3 is the agreement by which the defendant bid the right to<\/p>\n
collect sand from AVM Canal for the period 1990-91. Defendant<\/p>\n
had deposited Rs.16,067\/- being the 1\/3 of the total bid amount,<\/p>\n
being the successful bidder in the auction conducted by the<\/p>\n
Panchayath. The defendant agreed to deposit the balance 2\/3 of<\/p>\n
the bid amount in two equal instalments payable on 15.6.1990 &<\/p>\n
15.9.1990. By virtue of one of the clauses in the agreement the<\/p>\n
plaintiff reserved the right to cancel the auction and to re-auction<\/p>\n
the right if the defendant violates the provisions in the<\/p>\n
agreement.      The agreement also provides that the plaintiff<\/p>\n
Panchayath can realise the loss if any sustained in the re-auction.<\/p>\n
Ext.A4 is the copy of the notice issued to the defendant directing<\/p>\n
him to produce the solvency certificate. Ext.A6 is another notice<\/p>\n
issued to the defendant to show cause why re-auction shall not<\/p>\n
be conducted for violation of the terms in the agreement. Ext.A8<\/p>\n
is the resolution of the Panchayath dated 28.8.1990 to cancel the<\/p>\n
agreement and to conduct re-auction. Ext.A10 is the re-auction<\/p>\n
notice dated 1.9.1990.        Ext.A11 is the resolution of the<\/p>\n
Panchayath dated 22.9.1990 to confirm the re-auction in favour<\/p>\n
S.A.No.872 Of 1996<\/p>\n
                                ::5::\n<\/p>\n
of a third person for Rs.20,670\/-. According to the plaintiff since<\/p>\n
the defendant violated the terms of the agreement they are<\/p>\n
compelled to resort to re-auction the right at a reduced amount<\/p>\n
of Rs.20,670\/- and thus sustained a loss of Rs.11,463\/- which<\/p>\n
the Panchayath is entitled to realise from the defendant with<\/p>\n
interest.\n<\/p>\n
      5.    The appellant\/defendant brought to the notice of the<\/p>\n
trial court as well as the appellate court that there were protest<\/p>\n
from the local people public against collecting river sand from the<\/p>\n
AVM Canal. The defendant also pointed out that two strangers<\/p>\n
filed two suits as O.S.Nos.536\/1990 & 705\/1990 for permanent<\/p>\n
injunction restraining the present defendant from collecting sand<\/p>\n
from AVM Canal. The defendant also brought to the notice of the<\/p>\n
court that the Panchayath informed the defendant that he shall<\/p>\n
not remove sand in view of the prohibitory orders passed by the<\/p>\n
civil court. The decrees and judgments of the said suits have<\/p>\n
been produced by the appellant\/defendant to substantiate his<\/p>\n
contentions. Ext.B1 is the copy of the plaint in O.S.No.536\/1990.<\/p>\n
The prayer in that case is to restrain the defendant from dredging<\/p>\n
sand from AVM Canal on the western side of the plaint schedule<\/p>\n
S.A.No.872 Of 1996<\/p>\n
                                ::6::\n<\/p>\n
property. Ext.B2 is the judgment in the said suit. A decree was<\/p>\n
passed in that suit in favour of the plaintiff restraining the<\/p>\n
defendant from removing sand from the Canal on the western<\/p>\n
side of the plaint schedule property.  Ext.B3 is the interim order<\/p>\n
passed in O.S.No.705\/1990 filed by another stranger against the<\/p>\n
present defendant. Exts.B7 & B8 are the judgment and decree in<\/p>\n
O.S.No.705\/1990. The interim order of injunction passed by the<\/p>\n
court in O.S.No.705\/1990 and O.S.No.536\/1990 are dated<\/p>\n
31.5.1990 and 6.4.1990 respectively.\n<\/p>\n
      6.   It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellant that the interim order passed by the court in both suits<\/p>\n
remained in force till the suit was finally disposed of. The trial<\/p>\n
court also found that there was stiff resistance to sand dredging<\/p>\n
from the local public. Ext.A11 resolution dated 22.9.1990 passed<\/p>\n
by the Panchayath shows that there was stiff resistance to sand<\/p>\n
dredging from the local public. Therefore second auction was<\/p>\n
conducted excluding portions included in the first auction in view<\/p>\n
of the decision in O.S.No.536\/1990 and because of the stiff<\/p>\n
resistance of local public. The resolution of the Panchayath also<\/p>\n
shows that the contentions of the defendant stands proved. The<\/p>\n
S.A.No.872 Of 1996<\/p>\n
                                 ::7::\n<\/p>\n
resolution shows that dredging of snad was being opposed by the<\/p>\n
public in the locality. The trial court found that dredging of sand<\/p>\n
had come to a stand still in view of the pendency of the suits and<\/p>\n
the interim orders made wherein the Panchayath and the<\/p>\n
appellant\/defendant are parties to O.S.No.536\/1990.             The<\/p>\n
appellant is the defendant in O.S.No.705\/1990. The documents<\/p>\n
produced evidently show that there was interim order of<\/p>\n
injunction in force from 6.4.1990 & 31.5.1990 in the above said<\/p>\n
two suits. The period during which the defendant was entitled to<\/p>\n
collect river sand is for the period from 1.4.1990 till 31.3.1991.<\/p>\n
The interim order of injunction passed in O.S.No.536 of 1990 is<\/p>\n
dated 6.4.1990 and in O.S.No.705 of 1990 is dated 31.5.1990.<\/p>\n
This shows that during the beginning period itself the defendant<\/p>\n
was prevented from collecting river sand. The trial court also<\/p>\n
found that the prohibitory orders remained in force until June,<\/p>\n
1991 when the suit was finally disposed of. The trial court also<\/p>\n
held that from Ext.A11, it appears that the agreement covers the<\/p>\n
canal lying by the side of the property scheduled in O.S.No.536 of<\/p>\n
1990. Ext.A10 notice of re-auction has specifically excluded the<\/p>\n
said site, the area covering the interim injunction in O.S.No.536<\/p>\n
S.A.No.872 Of 1996<\/p>\n
                                 ::8::\n<\/p>\n
of 1990.     The trial court concluded that the performance of<\/p>\n
Ext.A3 agreement had become impossible in view of the<\/p>\n
pendency of the two suits. The trial court also followed the views<\/p>\n
expressed by the Apex Court regarding the principles relying on<\/p>\n
Section 56 of the Contract Act and held that Ext.A3 agreement<\/p>\n
has become void as far as the plaintiff and defendant are<\/p>\n
concerned. The trial court also considered the counter claim filed<\/p>\n
by the defendant claiming return of Rs.15,000\/- deposited with<\/p>\n
the plaintiff towards 1\/3 of the bid amount. On the basis of the<\/p>\n
decision in the suit, the trial court consequently held that the<\/p>\n
defendant is entitled to realise Rs.15,000\/- claimed in the counter<\/p>\n
claim with 12% interest.\n<\/p>\n
     7.    After considering the contentions raised by the<\/p>\n
appellant, this Court is of the view that the reasons and<\/p>\n
conclusions arrived at by the trial court dismissing the suit and<\/p>\n
passing a decree in favour of the defendant is justified in the<\/p>\n
facts and circumstances of the case. The lower appellate court<\/p>\n
reversed the decree and judgment mainly referring to the decree<\/p>\n
and judgment passed in the two suits, that in none of the<\/p>\n
documents there is reference that the injunction order and decree<\/p>\n
S.A.No.872 Of 1996<\/p>\n
                                 ::9::\n<\/p>\n
of injunction passed were in respect of AVM canal for which<\/p>\n
Ext.A3 agreement was entered into between the plaintiff and<\/p>\n
defendant. The trial court examined the interim orders and the<\/p>\n
decree and judgment passed in both suits and it is nobody’s case<\/p>\n
that it does not relate to the portion of the canal from which the<\/p>\n
plaintiff bit in auction the right to collect river sand. Even the<\/p>\n
appellate court held that it is clear that there was some<\/p>\n
obstruction for removal of sand as per Ext.A3 agreement, by the<\/p>\n
suits filed by the strangers. The appellate court further held that<\/p>\n
such obstruction does not mean that the defendant was fully<\/p>\n
prevented from collecting sand when prohibitory orders are<\/p>\n
issued by the civil court restraining the defendant from collecting<\/p>\n
river sand from the area for which he bid in auction the right to<\/p>\n
collect sand. The appellate court observed that it is not clear<\/p>\n
from the interim orders and decree and judgment, up to what<\/p>\n
extent he was prevented from collecting sand. One thing is clear<\/p>\n
that he was obstructed from collecting sand from the area.<\/p>\n
Therefore, the finding of the lower appellate court that so long as<\/p>\n
there is no evidence from the defendant’s side to substantiate<\/p>\n
his case of obstruction caused in performing the work, the only<\/p>\n
S.A.No.872 Of 1996<\/p>\n
                                  ::10::\n<\/p>\n
course open to the court is to accept the contentions of the<\/p>\n
defendant. On the facts and circumstances discussed above the<\/p>\n
plaintiff is not entitled to the reliefs in the suit. At the same time<\/p>\n
the defendant is entitled to realise the amount claimed in the<\/p>\n
counter claim being the amount deposited by him towards Ext.A3<\/p>\n
agreement.\n<\/p>\n
      In the result, the appeal is allowed.         The judgment and<\/p>\n
decree passed by the lower appellate court is set aside and the<\/p>\n
decree and judgment passed by the trial court is restored. There<\/p>\n
will be no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                                 HARUN-UL-RASHID,
\n                                                         Judge.\n<\/p>\n
bkn\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court K.Somon vs Kulathoor Panchayat on 30 July, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM SA.No. 872 of 1996() 1. K.SOMON … Petitioner Vs 1. KULATHOOR PANCHAYAT … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.SREEDHARAN NAIR For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon’ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID Dated :30\/07\/2010 O R D E R […]<\/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-102993","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nK.Somon vs Kulathoor Panchayat on 30 July, 2010 - 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-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"K.Somon vs Kulathoor Panchayat on 30 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-12-20T17:05:22+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\\\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"K.Somon vs Kulathoor Panchayat on 30 July, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-12-20T17:05:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1989,\"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\\\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010\",\"name\":\"K.Somon vs Kulathoor Panchayat on 30 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-12-20T17:05:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"K.Somon vs Kulathoor Panchayat on 30 July, 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":"K.Somon vs Kulathoor Panchayat on 30 July, 2010 - 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-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"K.Somon vs Kulathoor Panchayat on 30 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-12-20T17:05:22+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\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"K.Somon vs Kulathoor Panchayat on 30 July, 2010","datePublished":"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-12-20T17:05:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010"},"wordCount":1989,"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\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010","name":"K.Somon vs Kulathoor Panchayat on 30 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-12-20T17:05:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-somon-vs-kulathoor-panchayat-on-30-july-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"K.Somon vs Kulathoor Panchayat on 30 July, 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\/102993","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=102993"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/102993\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=102993"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=102993"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=102993"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}