{"id":109877,"date":"2010-11-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-11-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010"},"modified":"2018-05-03T23:44:37","modified_gmt":"2018-05-03T18:14:37","slug":"smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010","title":{"rendered":"Smt. Manjula W\/O Late Sri. … vs Sri. H Udayakumar S\/O Late Sri. … on 19 November, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Smt. Manjula W\/O Late Sri. … vs Sri. H Udayakumar S\/O Late Sri. … on 19 November, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: C.R.Kumaraswamy<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE 19\"' DAY OF' NOVEMBER, 2010 \n\nBEFORE)\n\nTHE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE o.R.KUMARAsw;-QM?'  .\n\nCRIMINAL PETITION No.4??? of? 20 \u00a30\"  . \nBetween: 1 A A ' A\n\n1. Smt.Manju1a\nAged about 50 years  *\nWife of late Sri.Srinivasa Reddy\n\n2. Sri.S.Ananda Reddy\" Aniddd'\nAged about 29 years  _ _    _\nSon of late Sri.Srinivasa R-ed;-dy__  \"\n3. Sri.S.Arun       :\nAged about3_22\u00a7y'eVars\u00ab  A \" \n\nSon of iai\u00e9  R'ed=1_1y \n\nAll are AR\/_a't. N\u00a21:;56,*\u00bb._.  -- \n\nSarakki ,_'I?.Pl1.aS~F_:, _ --\n\nJ.P.N'agar, A  A   \n\nBangalor\u00e9i \u00a2~\u00bb~ 56()._0.'?8;__  Petitioners\n\n(By Srsi-..AnarrclV_VR.'B..;*, A.d{foeate for\n\n M\/s..\u00ab.3<LeX~ Nex11s=,.\u00a2Adv oeates)\n\n'An'd:e "\n\nSri; \nAged--,about_ 56 years,\n\n 'Son of .L"a.f:e'Sri.Hanumaiah,\n-\u00abdijf.__R\u00bbesidiriget No.690\/Q,\n\n ' V.1.5"TeMain, 11 Phase,\n\n (I,Pv._N\u00a3i.'gar, Bangalore - 560 078,\n\n --.ff_Re'j3reAsented by his wife &\n\n"=--_C'zPA Hoider SmL.Bharathi.  Respondent<\/pre>\n
:.V'(Responder1t ~ served}<\/p>\n
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section
\n482 of Code of Criminal Procedure praying to set
\naside the order dated 04.01.2010 passed by the XVI
\nACMM, Bangalore in C.C.No.25\u20ac>\/10 and isstiing
\nprocess compelling the attendance of… *-the<\/p>\n
petitioners before him, quash all <\/p>\n
proceedings.\n<\/p>\n
This Petition coming on for <\/p>\n
day, the Court made the following”:\u00bb—-.\u00ab <\/p>\n
ORDE-.R<\/p>\n
,.___,__.\u00ab.\n<\/p>\n
This Criminal PetitionlVlli’i…sl’filedinunlldc-Zr ‘Section
\n482 of Code of Crirrlinal  to set
\naside the order dated O4fD_\u00a7   by the XVI<\/p>\n
ACMM, Bangalore’    and issuing<\/p>\n
process   attendance of the
\npetitioners _liloeforel\ufb01Vllq–irr1\u00bb._.and to quash all further<\/p>\n
proceedings,<\/p>\n
3-f’ha’Ve heard learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
=.Tl.10ugh the notice was served to the<\/p>\n
resp__ondent”,~–_. he remained unrepresented.<\/p>\n
 lll”The primary facts of the case is as under:<\/p>\n
Smt.Bharathi, the general power of attorney<\/p>\n
lifholder of Sri.l?i.Udayakumar had presented a<\/p>\n
complaint on behalf of her husband under Section<\/p>\n
200 of Code of Criminal Procedure before <\/p>\n
learned Additional Chief Metropolitan <\/p>\n
Bangalore. It is stated in the complaint V’<\/p>\n
Srinivasa Reddy had taken loan\u00bb..of_?5_”lall\u00a7’h.s\u00bb  <\/p>\n
her husband on :22,01.2007. :’~.i&t  <\/p>\n
Srinivasa Raddy, the husban_d”~.\u00a7)f
\nfather of accused Nos.2   the
\ninstalments regularly’  ?\u00ab’,,V’:\ufb02.:\\<5\u00a7=r_ij'pl:'ai.bnant. The
\ncomplainant further  '%~fre$_'\ufb01l,c–\u00a7~%nction of
\nthe said    Reddy,
\nH.Udayakum\u20acar heavy stroke and
\nwas  place. Therefore,
\nGPA ho1de'rxo'f was looking after the<\/p>\n
family _a_ffair4's"._:V'f'h.e lgelnleral power of attorney<\/p>\n
:_'j'h'o.1.deri,_.'l:'S,mt.'vBharaltVh'i'lVcontacted Srinivasa Reddy<\/p>\n
and make payment on 06.06.2009.\n<\/p>\n
0llt’\u00bb_.v.vThere’fo’re, _S’rt:i’1.r_ri}:vasa Redciy issued a cheque dated<\/p>\n
 W1 lakhs drawn on Central Bank of<\/p>\n
:I__n~r_’1″iaV,VffS_.arakki Layout, Bangalore. While issuing<\/p>\n
  cheque Srinivasa Reddy requested<\/p>\n
 S’mt.Bharathi not to present the cheque for few<\/p>\n
ex’<\/p>\n
days so that he could arrange the full amount and<\/p>\n
deposit the same in the bank. Hence, <\/p>\n
complainant d\ufb01d not present the cheque <\/p>\n
09.07.2009, Smt. Bharathi again <\/p>\n
Srinivas Reddy and requested to…m_ake_”pajftr2Ten’Vt  <\/p>\n
to deposit the sufficient amoLi:nt1’_”tto’: <\/p>\n
cheque issued by him En faV’out:–~rz ofthe
\nThe said Srinivas Reddy  to
\npresent the cheque  he further
\nassured that he   amount
\nin his  on
\nthe  compia\ufb01nant
\n through his
\nbanker   .}.P.Nagar Branch,<\/p>\n
Bangalore. u””I”‘._he~7’co.rnpzlair1ant was shocked on<\/p>\n
 becauseddddtdhde cheque issued by Srira\ufb01vasa<\/p>\n
~c4t\u00a3~shj.onoured on the ground “Funds<\/p>\n
 AInsufficdien_t.’5’.\ufb02.The complainant further stated that<\/p>\n
 knowing the fact of dishonour of cheque Smt.<\/p>\n
 ._B”hdarVath.\u00a3 approached ail the accused persons and<\/p>\n
V”=.._re’quested to make payment in respect of the said<\/p>\n
cheque. At that t\ufb01me, the compiainant was<\/p>\n
,
\n6;\n<\/p>\n
‘J<\/p>\n
shocked to know the fact that Srinivasa Reddy died<\/p>\n
on 17.07.2009. When Bharathi contacted ail the<\/p>\n
accused persons, they assured to repay the an’1’o_i1\u00abnit:\u00bb_<\/p>\n
within 7 days. Accordingly, the <\/p>\n
waited for some time and again when shied”c’–an\u00a3a’ct’e,d <\/p>\n
the accused persons personaliy, :’;;’he–y ‘gave’viag:_;e*:i;_’<\/p>\n
answer. Though Smt.Bha’r.athii’–.approaVcEi:e.d_H the<\/p>\n
accused persons number of tiii”mies, and’ issued} legal
\nnotice, they did not  t’he;,’_p.a’y\u00bbni..e’nt_. Thereafter,
\npower of attorney h.ofd’er’–.Ao,f ‘&’thie’=–.Lycomplainant<\/p>\n
Presented     <\/p>\n
The  of-..t1’ie compiainant was
\nrecorded. “TheI;’eVV(‘1’V:EiV\u00a3:$eV’1L’.@’11_”:\u00a9”4′.01.2010, iearned ACMM<\/p>\n
after pe1i”u_siin,gii . the ,:i_.’t’origina1 complaint and<\/p>\n
–v.,doeu.rn_enits prod–n,c_ed_aiong with the complaint and<\/p>\n
ifsworn s,ta.tem’ent of the compiainant was satisfied<\/p>\n
‘c_o–m’pi’ainant had made out a prima facie<\/p>\n
-caseuuto procieed against the accused for the offence<\/p>\n
 under Section 138 of Negotiabie<\/p>\n
.j__inst”ruAments Act. Therefore, a criminal case was<\/p>\n
-._i”r’egistered against the accused for the offence<\/p>\n
ax<\/p>\n
“gm<\/p>\n
punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable
\nInstruments Act and summons were also issued.
\nFeeling aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have<\/p>\n
preferred this Criminal Petition.<\/p>\n
4. It is the contention of iearned counsel foriwt\u00e9he<\/p>\n
petitioners that the procedure adopted;'”b’y–\u00abi.f_’–t._he:_.li_”\u00ab_<\/p>\n
iearneci Magistrate is improper. The  <\/p>\n
of the cheque has been dead.\n<\/p>\n
heirs cannot be fastene.ci.4_withi’iegaEtg.~-iliabiiiiigyi”<\/p>\n
Therefore, cognizance  by  learned
\nMagistrate is bad in <\/p>\n
Lea\u00a7\u00bb_..rn’ed icoLi’n.,se\u00bbi1 the petitioners relies on
\nthe foilowing ii1’t11iings.; ”\n<\/p>\n
 deci”sio.n<of Bombay High Court in the<\/p>\n
\\:as.\u00e9"\u00bbqf\u00bb._'sAvi'r.A at (ms vs. RAJESH DAMODAR<\/p>\n
SARODE :RIJA vs. K.VINAY reported in 2003 {:21 DCR<\/p>\n
 wherein paragraphs 10 and 23 read as follows:<\/p>\n
W10-\n<\/p>\n
husband of the accused even as on the
\ndate of presentation of the complaint,
\nFrom this, it is also clear that the order<\/p>\n
impugned under the revision p\u20actllylOI’]S’_W’* ii<\/p>\n
are illegal and improper and the  <\/p>\n
has resulted in miscarriage of ju.s,tiioe}f”‘<\/p>\n
By settled principle of 1a.’W,i”i’t\u00abA_i’s  <\/p>\n
that the revisional PowerstKofi:’.i_lih’is iiCo”u_rL   <\/p>\n
are not only limited in its sciope but..”al_so__
\ndiscretionary. In vieuiiioifrthe li”a,ct’s..V-iaiiol
\ncircumstances ofthe ea”sei,_:’–itayould’meet
\nthe ends of justiceipi.fi’.th1i:S. -were to
\ninterfere with th_e._or.ders:bi1’n~piu\u00a7i;.e’d and
\nset at ‘i’i\u00ab\u00aba_i”igh:t_ gthe ir1i.i_’s.c_arfriiage of<\/p>\n
justice’.””ii’   ~ <\/p>\n
(its)  .Andhra Pradesh High<\/p>\n
Court inieethe <\u00a7a.5e5fefi""s_;r-LiisAMPATHY AND ETC. vs.<\/p>\n
V SMT.,TyIA1&IJUiG1IxIi"Ti& AND ANOTHER ETC. reported in<\/p>\n
   262i." Head Note reads as follows:<\/p>\n
.   Instruments Act (26 of
\ni'.1_l'it881i)i7,_es.i42(a) — Criminal RC. (2 of
\n 195 \u00abM Cognizance of offence<\/p>\n
 it  ptirtishable under S. 138 –w Provisions of
\ntCriminal P.C. do not apply ~ Complaint
\nmade in name of complainant\/payee —<\/p>\n
Not signed by' complainant (pages) but<\/p>\n
t\/'<\/p>\n
_11_<\/p>\n
by his 'Power Attorney holder ~ Not
\nmaintainable ~ Since Power of Attorney
\nholder has no entity in terms of 8.142 –
\nPower of Attorney holder would not be a <\/p>\n
holder in due course of the cheque."<\/p>\n
5. it is undisputed fact that:the’C:-ra_wer~.__o’f.x.the <\/p>\n
cheque M\u00bb Srinivasa ReddyV,ex’_piredA on <\/p>\n
The death Certificate issuieiidhrby
\nauthority is produCedi:’_”‘o_y  eoitirxsiel for
\nthe petitioners for  disclose
\nthat Sriniva2’sa’}L..Reeldy   17.07.2009.
\nNormally,  against the
\naeeusediiiaib’ate’,s.la?-\u00a7’E3u:it–.i\u00bbpiri ith”e~–i’i1star1t case, before
\ninstituting’  the person who has
\nis s u e  h    e  __  <\/p>\n
 i’vTAhei”qititeist.ion that arises for my consideration<\/p>\n
isiittihiat iwi-hjpetiiher the criminal case can be filed<\/p>\n
igagainstiil.0egi;al heirs of the deceased person who had<\/p>\n
i..fisis’iu~-ed the cheque i.e. on the death of the drawer of<\/p>\n
 tiheiieheque? l answer this question in negative for<\/p>\n
it “the following reasons:\n<\/p>\n
{J\/it<\/p>\n
-12,<\/p>\n
7. it is the contention of learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
petitioners that the legal heirs of deceased<\/p>\n
Srinivasa Redd}! cannot be made as accused,”<\/p>\n
support of his contention, he has reliedfon\ufb02fi;–h:eii<\/p>\n
above mentioned rulings. There is no  in<\/p>\n
the Negotiable lnstruments Actiyto <\/p>\n
the legal heirs of the drawer-..__of  their<\/p>\n
offence punishable under  the
\nNegotiable lnstrument.sii:’*Ptct1.  case,
\nthe transaction  _.~b\/\u00a2i\u00abiVi’i\\”ii\\~i1{‘x~hiindividuals.\n<\/p>\n
Therefore,    the cheque
\ndies, his i”‘is1,tic’\u20accessors cannot be
\narrayed?’  tliieiiiiioffenee punishable
\nunder  Negotiable lnstruments<\/p>\n
Act. ;’~ln tha,t’vi’eviz’-  the matter, the criminal<\/p>\n
iipr.oc”eed=ingis..’agaiiniist the petitioners herein cannot<\/p>\n
ibe._proe:e–eided._further and the same is liable to be<\/p>\n
dismiss,ed_f:_–This is one of the rarest of the rare<\/p>\n
i”eases;.V\\r}~here this Court can exercise its inherent<\/p>\n
 to quash the proceedings of the criminal<\/p>\n
 _vc_ase filed against the legal representatives of the<\/p>\n
deceased person who had issued a cheque.<\/p>\n
it-\/”\n<\/p>\n
_13_<\/p>\n
Therefore, this (irhninal Pet\ufb01ion deserves to be<\/p>\n
a\ufb01owed.\n<\/p>\n
8. In the resu&t,I pass the R\ufb02low\ufb01ngz<\/p>\n
ORDER _wH<\/p>\n
(i) This Criminal Petition is a\u00a7=:pu::’_ed*;’<\/p>\n
(\ufb02) Consequenthg prbeeedingsx . he e,%CfC.<\/p>\n
No.25\u20ac>\/2010 p\u00a2ndingi____:Lm,_ v.1_;_he fiI_e  gif XVI
\nAddihonai Chk\ufb01T,Meu@@5\ufb011\u00a7h_ Maghmraug<\/p>\n
Bangaloreis hereby quashedfe “W <\/p>\n
AHB<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Smt. Manjula W\/O Late Sri. … vs Sri. H Udayakumar S\/O Late Sri. … on 19 November, 2010 Author: C.R.Kumaraswamy IN THE HIGH COURT OF’ KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 19″‘ DAY OF’ NOVEMBER, 2010 BEFORE) THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE o.R.KUMARAsw;-QM?’ . CRIMINAL PETITION No.4??? of? 20 \u00a30″ . Between: 1 […]<\/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-109877","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSmt. Manjula W\/O Late Sri. ... vs Sri. H Udayakumar S\/O Late Sri. ... on 19 November, 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\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Smt. Manjula W\/O Late Sri. ... vs Sri. H Udayakumar S\/O Late Sri. ... on 19 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-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=\"2010-11-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-03T18:14:37+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\\\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Smt. Manjula W\\\/O Late Sri. … vs Sri. H Udayakumar S\\\/O Late Sri. … on 19 November, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-03T18:14:37+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1427,\"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-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010\",\"name\":\"Smt. Manjula W\\\/O Late Sri. ... vs Sri. H Udayakumar S\\\/O Late Sri. ... on 19 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-03T18:14:37+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Smt. Manjula W\\\/O Late Sri. … vs Sri. H Udayakumar S\\\/O Late Sri. … on 19 November, 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":"Smt. Manjula W\/O Late Sri. ... vs Sri. H Udayakumar S\/O Late Sri. ... on 19 November, 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\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Smt. Manjula W\/O Late Sri. ... vs Sri. H Udayakumar S\/O Late Sri. ... on 19 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-11-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-03T18:14:37+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\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Smt. Manjula W\/O Late Sri. … vs Sri. H Udayakumar S\/O Late Sri. … on 19 November, 2010","datePublished":"2010-11-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-03T18:14:37+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010"},"wordCount":1427,"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-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010","name":"Smt. Manjula W\/O Late Sri. ... vs Sri. H Udayakumar S\/O Late Sri. ... on 19 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-11-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-03T18:14:37+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-manjula-wo-late-sri-vs-sri-h-udayakumar-so-late-sri-on-19-november-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Smt. Manjula W\/O Late Sri. … vs Sri. H Udayakumar S\/O Late Sri. … on 19 November, 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\/109877","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=109877"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/109877\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=109877"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=109877"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=109877"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}