{"id":106640,"date":"2008-09-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008"},"modified":"2015-09-04T06:32:28","modified_gmt":"2015-09-04T01:02:28","slug":"smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"Smt Sharadamma vs Sri Gunashekar on 5 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Smt Sharadamma vs Sri Gunashekar on 5 September, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: S.R.Bannurmath & Gowda<\/div>\n
 \n\nDated this the sub day of SCPtembcI3  \u00a7[j :   .\n\nPresent: \n\nrm Korma: an-. JIIST'IC'.B\u00a7 55.2.     1; v[ .'\n\n'rim Hozrnm xx. JtIS'I'I\u20ac:E   '\n\nREGULAR mzgfr a.1\u00a7rr=::..'1;,z(e. % 1'766[ \n\nBETWEEN :\n\nSmi. Sharadamma;  ~ \nW\/0 late Sri D. :S'1tam'_'--an1aa, 1: ..\nAged about 60.   . ' \nR\/at No. 24,?  b   V.\nNext to PIatoInaticS_.P1'o.~iua':t\u00e9.- ~\n\nB. Naxayaiiapuf\ufb01gl, \"ii\". \"  \nWhite\ufb01eld Road;     \nDooravax\ufb01nagar      ' \nBangalore-5.60.0I6;.  ,_  % ...APPELLAN'1'\n\n(By Szji.' \u20ac?--._S. V%SW\u00a7$W\ufb01I3;' Senior Adv., for\n\n:As__sociafes,.....Smt. I-LR. Vasudha, Adv.)\n\nS\ufb01 \nS \/ o  \n\n ' Aged about 45 years,\n'A 1  -- .. [at No.\" 1680,\n _ \u00bb'2n<% Crass, 3rd Stage,\n   -Pr "shllagar,\n ._ "Ba1\u00a71galore-560 O21.  RESPOHDEN1'\n\nV  ' ._  ;'{By Sri. Subha Rae for M\/S Subba Rao,\n\nSri B.V. Gangieddy, Adv. for C] R)\n\n\n\nThis Rcgular First Appeal is \ufb01led under  1\nr\/W Section 96 of CPC against the Judgment  \n\n3.4.2007 passed in O.S.No. 1051\/2903 on the  \n11* Additional City Civil Judge,   \n\nfor speci\ufb01c performance of \n\nThis appeal being  rcsci*a\u00e9;d'A    at is \ncoming on for Pmnotgnccxnent gmfV"-..judg\u00e9:incnt.v th5.s day,\nBannurmath J., deliv\u00e9r5:;t-   _\n\n   V 'n;:iy:1 _th.\u00a7 Imsuccess\ufb01xl defendant\n\n   dated 3.4.3007 passed by\nthe  VVII"-'3_Q""City Civil Judge, Bangalore City in\n0.3.  'A v\n\n *  facts giving raise to the present appeal are as\n\n'folibwsz . '  L'  \n\n '1"'1.:1c respondent] plaintiff' hczein had \ufb01led a suit for<\/pre>\n
 pexformance of the contract against the<\/p>\n
” appeliant\/ defendant herein in respect of the suit schedule<\/p>\n
P1’0P\u20acI’t}’-\n<\/p>\n
6″”\n<\/p>\n
11<\/span><\/p>\n
exercising the judicious discretion as required under Section 20<\/p>\n
of the Act, the impugned judgement and decree
\nuxxsustainabie. it is also submitted that, evenwiiiiougii
\nCourt had framed the additionai “i;s’sug_  -;  \ufb01\ufb01aeb T.
\nalternate prayer for refund, not  by
\nCourt indicates non application     V<\/p>\n
the irnpuged judgment and  Eable    aside.\n<\/p>\n
8. On tilejotherihiwa\ufb02nib  Sii\u00ab.V:’S;1;bi5a;\u00ab’f\u00a7iao, learned Senior
\nCounsel  for  pi\u00e9iiniiiijirespondent argued in<\/p>\n
supportiof   Q33  and decree passed in<\/p>\n
his favoliii u ”\n<\/p>\n
    that, the decision relied upon by the<\/p>\n
  in the case of 1MDA.R:!0 –::a- usage<\/p>\n
    P.D%0UzA -13- EHONDRHLO NAIDU [2904-{5} SCC 549]
\nV A  es such, it will not help the appellant to take his case any
\n \ufb01irther. it is submitted that, the intention of the parties has to<\/p>\n
u be gathered by bare reading of the document —- Ex.P.2 and as its<\/p>\n
  6] has been held as per incurium in the later<\/p>\n
nomenclature or titie and the terms and conditions put therein<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
clearly indicate that, that eyes opened the defenda\ufb01t-jt_’c.:entercd
\ninto an agreement of sale, which was rightly <\/p>\n
Court and as such, the present appe._a.I__is deiicidef is <\/p>\n
submitted that, so far as clauses; 4;’_e.t::.t1 s.;.t   ‘<\/p>\n
pointed out by the
\nthat they are only penal    case, the
\ndefendant failed to  t contract and merely
\nbecause option is g;ivee..to.:’th.e tfloes not mean that
\nthe Court    speci\ufb01c performance.\n<\/p>\n
The  pronouncement in the
\ncast:  mum’ [2004f6) sec 649;,
\nas.  Ajgesnzjf-‘ sax. smamnamsnuz [Am 2007
\nSC 1236}   <\/p>\n
V    have heard both the Counsel at length and<\/p>\n
AA \u00ab.11. At the outset, we have to note that the<\/p>\n
‘  tjrotacuncement in the case of IMDARAO -93- HARM) [1999f8)<\/p>\n
”  416] has been distriztgujshed and declared as per ina1nu’ m<\/p>\n
in the iater decision. in the case of P.D’SOI3ZA –w- SHONDRILO<\/p>\n
%w<\/p>\n
13<\/span><\/p>\n
1\\\u00a3dIDU{2004(6) SOC 64913116 as such, the same&Vis_’4ef for<\/p>\n
the appellant’s contentions.\n<\/p>\n
12. However, the Division     ‘case
\nof am. away: -03- Dr. 3.3.  met’ ‘
\n224] has held that, Where \ufb02l\ufb01,-agvk-‘\ufb02\ufb01l\ufb01\ufb01\ufb02t provideerv option to the<\/p>\n
vendor to repay the moiiey  property and the<\/p>\n
parties have  Vgigxfeernentett  that manner and –<\/p>\n
   such option, Whether<\/p>\n
it wou1d._rrot~ to\ufb01gant the decree for speci\ufb01c
\nperformance  it 1 to the terms of the
\nagreement and   right of the prospective
\nventior to t;jxe1’eise    pay o\ufb02’ the amount and<\/p>\n
    The scope of this question. was<\/p>\n
  Apex Court vie-\u00e9-v”is., Sections 20, 23<\/p>\n
T’  10  the case of M.L. DEFENDER SINGH -vs-<\/p>\n
‘  H  1973 SC 2457], the i~Ion’h1e Supreme Court<\/p>\n
V    <\/p>\n
”16. The posi\ufb01on stated above is in
\noorjomzity with the principles found
\nstated in Sir Edward I4Yy’s “Treatise on<\/p>\n
“Mu<\/p>\n
the Specific Performance of  ‘  ”\n<\/p>\n
(Sixth Edn. Atp.65). It was said thefe: V  –  ”<\/p>\n
\u00abfile question
\nthe contract? Is it   oef\u00a3ein’  K  V’
\nshall be done,”t;y;;{z atsunz.  <\/p>\n
\nwhether by way of perzqfty er
\nto secure, “the ._of  irery
\nact? Or, \u00a35′-.’t’  ‘two things
\nshalt be    party<\/p>\n
 ‘Qf or the payment<\/p>\n
“the :\u00a7ym_jefVfn\u00e9neVq?,51jt” the former, the<\/p>\n
 AfciC:tVofVA3thepen,gI or other like sum being\n<\/p>\n
—  prevent the Court’s<\/p>\n
 \u00bb._e:g,fore:’ng of the very act, and<\/p>\n
 into execution the intention<\/p>\n
of the  If the latter, the oonmtct is<\/p>\n
 :v’;-settis\ufb01ed by the payment of a sum of<\/p>\n
  and there is no gmu”nd for<\/p>\n
‘  against the party having the<\/p>\n
election to compel the performance of the
\nother alternative.\n<\/p>\n
From what has been said it will be
\ngathered that contracts ff the kind new
\nunder d1′:5c:uss~.\u00bb’on are diweible into three<\/p>\n
cfasseesr<\/p>\n
\u00e9\/<\/p>\n
14<\/span><\/p>\n
  If in other respects it can and<\/p>\n
15<\/span><\/p>\n
(1′) Where the sum  v  Vt”  H
\nstrictly a penalty w a
\nof seazring the
\ncontract, as the   1  <\/p>\n
(it) Where the name * di zofbe
\npaid as  ”   for a
\nOfthe oontrg\u00a7,\u00a2t;_” ”  V V’ ”\n<\/p>\n
  “(:’i:’)  zh\u00e9”~\u00e9um+\ufb01_gmd is an
\n1,  zh;e’_  which magL__!g_e
\nV \u00bb.sebe;jm\u00a3\u00a3:g;f$rVt.’theberf\u00e9o\ufb01rzance of the ad
\n”  of ihetierson Qlyxhem the<\/p>\n
”     or the act done.\n<\/p>\n
u”    the stipulated payment
\n  either Of the two \ufb01?’st-\n<\/p>\n
‘jitezttioned heads, the Court will ergforce<\/p>\n
Xftllght to be enforced, just in the same
\nVwayasaoontractnottodeapartiwlar
\nact, with a penalty added to secure its
\npezfomzanoe or (1 sum named as
\nliquidated damages, may be spea\ufb01callg
\nenforced by means of an irgiwzction
\nagainst breaking it. On the other mg,
\nwhere the contract comes under the third
\nhead, it is satis\ufb01ed by the paggnent of the<\/p>\n
17<\/span><\/p>\n
the i~Io11’b1e Supreme Court, the Court is required to determine<\/p>\n
this aspect on the facts and circumstances of eaeh-V <\/p>\n
it, to \ufb01nd out whether speci\ufb01c perfoI’mance.’:_:ofV  <\/p>\n
convey a property ought to be  or ‘not.<\/p>\n
14. On detail reading of Ex;.P.2::’a11s1   4 <\/p>\n
and 5 therein, in our view, eieariy iuci-ieiates \u00a3t1:’v”t5.vt}:;eVVi1:J:teni:iorx
\nof the party was never to go  of   Ciausc 5 of
\nthe agreement gives ..fh\\&A’%*\u00a2nnd0I’AA  Iefund the
\nadvance sale con_side1atio_n_   the time \ufb01xed<\/p>\n
for    4 of the said agreement
\nfmthervvielearlgir -.that:\u00a2~*’even in case Where vendor fails to<\/p>\n
execute the4″‘rengVisteied”vsai’edeed and even where the purchaser<\/p>\n
 ,.,_is  with  “” “balance sale consideration within the<\/p>\n
   then the vendor is only Iequimd to refund the<\/p>\n
  jilconsideration along with liquidated damages at<\/p>\n
 the rate of 3% per month or 36% per annum. In our view, as<\/p>\n
A ~?_”‘  these two clear options available to the vendor, them is<\/p>\n
 absolutely no clause indicating the right of the pmvchaser to<\/p>\n
“take steps for speci\ufb01c performance in case the alleged vendor<\/p>\n
failed to perform her part. Such clause is normally found in<\/p>\n
\u00e9p,<\/p>\n
18<\/span><\/p>\n
agreement of sale and on the other hand, clauses 4 “abeing<\/p>\n
most unusual, it can be gathered that, the  fine<\/p>\n
parties was never to sell and purchase   j  <\/p>\n
dispute, but Ex.P.2 was executed’  :’t\u20ac:3..’_2e<\/p>\n
amount of Rs.2,50,00{)\/~ advanced and tedmiitediyv\u00e9paidt to <\/p>\n
defendant by the purchaser.   clear from
\nthe conduct of the  _ out by \ufb01ll’?\n<\/p>\n
learned Counsel for  this was an
\nagreement for   have permitted the
\nvendor to   construction in the
\nproperty  i;t1:ve”v~e,1’iege:vivvVetgreement and similarly if
\nreally the ctefendent  of selling, she would not have<\/p>\n
spent nfmney    construction in the existing<\/p>\n
   would have gone to the alleged<\/p>\n
  that immediately after receiving the sum of<\/p>\n
 ,_Rs.2;5\u20ac)1;,bA00\/e”‘eifraim the plasma: the defendant put up<\/p>\n
 4een\u00bbst1″I1ctann;;.is not disputed by the plainti\ufb01’ and in fact, in his<\/p>\n
 ereeejej\u00e9enzinaiion, he admits to the same.<\/p>\n
 H 15. Similarly, even before the pIa1’nti\ufb02’Woke up by issuing<\/p>\n
 legal notice dated 9.11.2002, the conduct of the party is<\/p>\n
19<\/span><\/p>\n
relevant to be noted. Seven days prior to the said no\ufb01ce —
\nEx.P.4 issued by the plainti\ufb02 on 2.2.2002, the defendanttthhs in<\/p>\n
fact lodged a poiice complaint narrating the <\/p>\n
under which Ex.P.2 came into existence,….the.x  <\/p>\n
conduct of the p1aiz1ti\ufb01’ in  <\/p>\n
ageement of sale and thexeby_\u00bbfomin\u00abg-  defen\u00e9ant to  tsp<\/p>\n
police coxnpiaint in this Iegaztlf\u00bb 6:[1:1.\u00e9002, in
\nfact the defendant has as per’  wherein
\nagain the circumstances as been narrated<\/p>\n
in detail. No deuht the   to this as per Ex.P.4<\/p>\n
men\ufb01or\ufb01n\u00e9     an egieement of sale and not loan
\neansactioe, ..wm\u00a2h’ only title of the deed — Ex.P.2<\/p>\n
and the a\ufb02egegi  of sale. In our v’mW, on detail<\/p>\n
  we”\ufb01r–.d”that, by xeading clauses 4 and 5 in<\/p>\n
  surrounding circumstances and the conduct of<\/p>\n
the  only a loan txsansaetion and Ex.P.2 came to<\/p>\n
C be  or by way of security and both the parties never<\/p>\n
   act upon it as an agreement of sale. The possibility<\/p>\n
  enbsequent dispute between the parties because of the<\/p>\n
”  not giving the receipts for the interest paid, it has<\/p>\n
resulted in the present suit. By reading the clauses in the<\/p>\n
,\u00a7'”\n<\/p>\n
20<\/span><\/p>\n
agreement especially clauses 4 and 5, as them is”<\/p>\n
giving any right to the purchaser for enfoiciz-i\ufb01’   4′<\/p>\n
agitement and on the other hand: as-   <\/p>\n
panic” s themselves agzeed that in the’.ev?e_i3i’lvoflbIeac_vA” <\/p>\n
remedy would be by way of  for  V L’<\/p>\n
in our opinion, the  .._$ucll  is
\nlegally estopped from   other than such<\/p>\n
compensation or c\u00a3\u00e91mage;;;””* — if<\/p>\n
16;. In  i1oi1…_conside1*atio11 of these aspects by
\nthe 13331″   “t1ie;i\u00a7*’  prospective has resulted in the<\/p>\n
unjusji’a’.ng1 illegal  elven otheiwise, We \ufb01nd that the trial<\/p>\n
V   to elcemise its d1scre’ tion under Section 20 of<\/p>\n
  the Section directs the jurisdiction to decree<\/p>\n
  a  for  performance is discretion and the Court is not<\/p>\n
  bound  such zelief mexely because it is lawful to do so;<\/p>\n
VA   discretion of the Court is not arbitrary but sound and<\/p>\n
 mgsonabxs, gumed by judicial principles and capable of<\/p>\n
 correction by a court of appeal. in our v\ufb01ew, the trial. Court has<\/p>\n
failed to exercise this jurisdiction properly.<\/p>\n
-0=9’f”$<\/p>\n
21<\/span><\/p>\n
17. Looking at the case from any angle, we  the<\/p>\n
impugned judgment and deczee is <\/p>\n
the \ufb01ndings above and as such, thesame iset <\/p>\n
aside.\n<\/p>\n
18. in the result and  _1jeas<":\u00ab"11S.VV:S"t.ett:rvViv; above, the<\/p>\n
appeal is allowed in  \ufb02erms:\n<\/p>\n
a) The:’j1;dg1r:xe:it  3.4.2007 passed<\/p>\n
  1\/.2\u00a2\u00e9%;;_;a’  xx Additional City<\/p>\n
_ ____  v_  decreeing the suit for
\nspeci\ufb01c; ..  aside and in
\nsubs\ufb01t\ufb01fteq\u00e9    elefexldant is directed<\/p>\n
to asuz\ufb01 61′. 2,$E},0G0\/ – (Rupees two lakhs<\/p>\n
   only) with interest at the agreed<\/p>\n
   p\u00a73;.’:inonth \ufb01mn 23.03.2002 tiii the<\/p>\n
daiie..of  myment.\n<\/p>\n
VA  ‘*fV’i1e. ciefendantj appeiiant is aiso divested to pay to
\n    p}aint.i\ufb01’ a sum of Rs.20,()90\/– (Rupees twenty<\/p>\n
 thousand only) as damages.\n<\/p>\n
gy-\n<\/p>\n
Nsu\/–\n<\/p>\n
22<\/span><\/p>\n
C) In the circumstances ofjizhc cas\u00e9,”  ;:_) ax’tieVs  .L <\/p>\n
directed to bear their   <\/p>\n
sal-\n<\/p>\n
      \u00a2 <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Smt Sharadamma vs Sri Gunashekar on 5 September, 2008 Author: S.R.Bannurmath & Gowda Dated this the sub day of SCPtembcI3 \u00a7[j : . Present: rm Korma: an-. JIIST’IC’.B\u00a7 55.2. 1; v[ .’ ‘rim Hozrnm xx. JtIS’I’I\u20ac:E ‘ REGULAR mzgfr a.1\u00a7rr=::..’1;,z(e. % 1’766[ BETWEEN : Smi. Sharadamma; ~ W\/0 late Sri D. :S’1tam’_’–an1aa, […]<\/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-106640","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSmt Sharadamma vs Sri Gunashekar on 5 September, 2008 - 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\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Smt Sharadamma vs Sri Gunashekar on 5 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-09-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-09-04T01:02:28+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Smt Sharadamma vs Sri Gunashekar on 5 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-04T01:02:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1654,\"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\\\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008\",\"name\":\"Smt Sharadamma vs Sri Gunashekar on 5 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-04T01:02:28+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Smt Sharadamma vs Sri Gunashekar on 5 September, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Smt Sharadamma vs Sri Gunashekar on 5 September, 2008 - 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\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Smt Sharadamma vs Sri Gunashekar on 5 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-09-04T01:02:28+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Smt Sharadamma vs Sri Gunashekar on 5 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-04T01:02:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008"},"wordCount":1654,"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\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008","name":"Smt Sharadamma vs Sri Gunashekar on 5 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-04T01:02:28+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-sharadamma-vs-sri-gunashekar-on-5-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Smt Sharadamma vs Sri Gunashekar on 5 September, 2008"}]},{"@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\/106640","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=106640"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/106640\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=106640"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=106640"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=106640"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}