{"id":10447,"date":"2007-10-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-10-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007"},"modified":"2016-10-27T19:39:42","modified_gmt":"2016-10-27T14:09:42","slug":"the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007","title":{"rendered":"The Branch Manager vs Sivamani on 22 October, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">The Branch Manager vs Sivamani on 22 October, 2007<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\n\nDATED : 22\/10\/2007\n\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA\n\n\nC.M.A(MD).No.1136 of 2007\nand\nM.P(MD)No.1 of 2007\nand\nCaveat No.773 of 2006\n\n\nThe Branch Manager,\nUnited India Insurance Co. Ltd.,\n254, Goods Shed Street,\nMadurai-1.\t\t\t\t... \tAppellant\n\n\nVs\n\n\n1.Sivamani\n2.Subbiah\t\t\t\t... \tRespondents\n\n\nPrayer\n\n\nAppeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, to set aside\nthe award passed in M.A.C.O.P.No.163 of 2004 dated 21.10.2005 by the Motor\nAccident Claims Tribunal (Fast Track Court), Dindigul.\n\n\n!For Appellant  \t...\tMr.S.Natarajan\n\n\n^For Respondent \t...\tMr.A.Saravanan for R.1\n\n\t\t\t\tNo representation for R.2\n\n\n:JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tThe unsuccessful second respondent, the United Insurance Company Limited<br \/>\nappeals.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is focussed to get set aside the award<br \/>\npassed in M.A.C.O.P.No.163 of 2004 dated 21.10.2005 by the Motor Accident Claims<br \/>\nTribunal (Fast Track Court), Dindigul.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. At the stage of admission itself, after hearing both sides, this appeal<br \/>\nis being disposed of by the following order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. The facts giving rise to the filing of this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal<br \/>\nwould run thus:\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe United India Insurance Co. Ltd., is the appellant herein, who filed<br \/>\nthe appeal being aggrieved by the judgment of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal<br \/>\n(Fast Track Court), Dindigul, in awarding compensation to the tune of<br \/>\nRs.1,05,858\/- (Rupees One Lakh Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty Eight only)<br \/>\nunder the following sub-heads:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(i) For Pain and Sufferings\t\t&#8211; Rs.10,000.00\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(ii) For Medicines as per Ex.P.4\t&#8211; Rs.15,477.00\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(iii) For Medicines as per Ex.P.5  \t&#8211; Rs. 2,781.00\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(iv) For Permanent Disability\t\t&#8211; Rs.57,600.00\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(v) For Transport Charges\t\t\t&#8211; Rs. 2,000.00\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(vi)For Nutritious Food\t\t\t&#8211; Rs. 4,000.00\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(vii)For Loss of Incomes\t\t\t&#8211; Rs. 9,000.00\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(viii) For Future Medical Treatment\t&#8211; Rs. 5,000.00\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tRs.1,05,858.00\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. The grounds of appeal inter alia would run thus:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(i) The accident occurred due to the fault of the injured and not due to<br \/>\nthe driver of the vehicle belonged to first respondent in M.C.O.P, the owner of<br \/>\nthe taxi.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(ii) The compensation was not quantified in accordance with the dicta laid<br \/>\ndown by the Honourable Apex Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(iii) The Tribunal simply assumed that the injured was earning a sum of<br \/>\nRs.3,000\/-.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(iv) Accordingly, the appellant prayed for setting aside the award of<br \/>\ncompensation.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. Per contra, the learned Counsel for the claimant\/first respondent<br \/>\nherein, would contend that the amount awarded is very moderate and in fact, if<br \/>\nstrict standards are applied, he would be entitled to more compensation also as<br \/>\nhe sustained grievous injuries and plate was fixed in his fractured part of the<br \/>\nleg.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. The points for determination in this appeal are:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(i) Whether the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent act of the<br \/>\ndriver of the first respondent in M.C.O.P or due to the rash and negligent act<br \/>\nof the injured claimant?\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(ii) Whether the compensation is on the higher side?\n<\/p>\n<p>Point No:(i)<\/p>\n<p>\t8. The quint-essence of the case of the claimant is that while he was<br \/>\ndriving his two wheeler along the Dindigul-Trichy main road from south to north,<br \/>\nthe taxi belonging to the first respondent came in a rash and negligent manner<br \/>\nand took a turn and dashed as against the claimant and thereby caused grievous<br \/>\ninjury to him.  Relating to the fracture of the left leg sustained by the<br \/>\nclaimant, he took treatment in the hospital between 21.12.2003 and 04.01.2004.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9. The police also registered a case.  The grievance of the appellant<br \/>\nInsurance Company is that the trial Court without appreciating the evidence,<br \/>\nsimply fixed the responsibility on the driver of the taxi.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10. Perused the order of the Tribunal which relied upon the deposition of<br \/>\nthe injured himself who drove the two wheeler at the time of the accident and<br \/>\nplaced reliance on the fact that the driver of the taxi was not examined so as<br \/>\nto torpedo the evidence of the injured and accordingly awarded the compensation.<br \/>\nSuch an approach appears to be correct for the reason that if at all, the<br \/>\nInsurance Company had any challenge relating to the fixation of responsibility<br \/>\non the driver of the taxi, he ought to have taken steps to get the injured<br \/>\nsummoned and examined before the Court.  Without even raising its little finger<br \/>\nin taking such steps before the Tribunal, the Insurance Company at the appellate<br \/>\nstage, is not justified in finding fault with the finding given by the Tribunal.<br \/>\nIt is a trite proposition of law that in matters of awarding compensation, the<br \/>\nTribunal is not expected to approach the evidence of the injured with draconian<br \/>\neye, even though the driver of the taxi was not examined.  The Tribunal adverted<br \/>\nto the fact that while the injured was riding his two wheeler from south to<br \/>\nnorth along Dindigul &#8211; Trichy main road, the offending vehicle namely the taxi<br \/>\nwhich stood in stationary position in front of the hospital, was suddenly<br \/>\nstarted by its driver and he took a right turn without showing signal resulting<br \/>\nin causing the accident. It is common knowledge that the driver of the taxi, who<br \/>\nis taking such a turn, should be cautious  in doing so, so as to avoid any<br \/>\npossible accident.  But, in this case, no such precaution has been taken by the<br \/>\ndriver of the taxi.  Hence, in such a case, I cannot find fault with the finding<br \/>\nof the Tribunal.  Accordingly, Point No.(i) is decided.\n<\/p>\n<p>Point No:(ii)<\/p>\n<p>\t11. The learned Counsel for the appellant would develop his argument to<br \/>\nthe effect that without any basis simply the Tribunal fixed the quantum of<br \/>\nincome as Rs.3,000\/-.  I am of the considered opinion that even a coolie now a<br \/>\ndays, is earning a sum not less than Rs.100\/- per day and as such the Tribunal<br \/>\ntook the monthly income as Rs.3,000\/-.  Here, in this case, the claimant happens<br \/>\nto be a person who is fabricating iron boxes.  In my opinion, no one would<br \/>\nengage in the trade of fabricating iron boxes without even getting an income of<br \/>\nRs.100\/- per day.  This sort of common sense approach is absolutely required on<br \/>\nthe part of the Tribunal and the Tribunal also correctly adhered to such<br \/>\napproach.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12. However, I could see considerable force in the submission made by the<br \/>\nlearned Counsel for the Insurance Company that without any basis a sum of<br \/>\nRs.5,000\/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) was awarded towards further medical<br \/>\nexpenses for removing the plate.  In page No.7 of the certified copy of the<br \/>\njudgment, the Tribunal simply assessed the quantum at Rs.5,000\/- for future<br \/>\nmedical treatment.  In my opinion, for that there is no plausible medical<br \/>\ncertificate.  I recollect that as per the cantena of decisions of the Honourable<br \/>\nApex Court, in awarding the compensation for future medical treatment, there<br \/>\nshould be clear evidence and in the absence of it, it should not be awarded<br \/>\nblindly.  In fact, in Government Hospitals, if he wants to get the plate<br \/>\nremoved, then I am of the considered opinion that he need not incur an<br \/>\nexpenditure of Rs.5,000\/-.  Keeping this in view, I would like to delete the<br \/>\nassessment of compensation of Rs.5,000\/- under the head &#8216;future medical<br \/>\nexpenses&#8217; from the total compensation and in respect of other sub-heads, there<br \/>\nis no reason to interfere.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t13. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of with the<br \/>\nabove finding.  Consequently, connected M.P(MD)No.1 of 2007 and Caveat No.773 of<br \/>\n2006 are also closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>rsb<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.The  Commissioner,<br \/>\n  The Corporation of Madurai,<br \/>\n  Alagar Koil Road,<br \/>\n  Madurai &#8211; 625 002.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The III Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.The Principal District Munsif, Madurai.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court The Branch Manager vs Sivamani on 22 October, 2007 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22\/10\/2007 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA C.M.A(MD).No.1136 of 2007 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2007 and Caveat No.773 of 2006 The Branch Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., 254, Goods Shed Street, Madurai-1. &#8230; Appellant [&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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10447","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>The Branch Manager vs Sivamani on 22 October, 2007 - 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\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Branch Manager vs Sivamani on 22 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-10-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-10-27T14:09:42+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Branch Manager vs Sivamani on 22 October, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-10-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-27T14:09:42+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1178,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007\",\"name\":\"The Branch Manager vs Sivamani on 22 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-10-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-27T14:09:42+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Branch Manager vs Sivamani on 22 October, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"The Branch Manager vs Sivamani on 22 October, 2007 - 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\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Branch Manager vs Sivamani on 22 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-10-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-10-27T14:09:42+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Branch Manager vs Sivamani on 22 October, 2007","datePublished":"2007-10-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-27T14:09:42+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007"},"wordCount":1178,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007","name":"The Branch Manager vs Sivamani on 22 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-10-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-27T14:09:42+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-sivamani-on-22-october-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Branch Manager vs Sivamani on 22 October, 2007"}]},{"@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\/10447","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=10447"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10447\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10447"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10447"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10447"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}