{"id":110227,"date":"2010-02-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010"},"modified":"2017-07-26T19:06:41","modified_gmt":"2017-07-26T13:36:41","slug":"b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"B Xavier vs Khamarunnisa on 6 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
B Xavier vs Khamarunnisa on 6 February, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: L.Narayana Swamy<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA\n\nAT BANGALORE\n\nDATED THIS THE 5*\" DAY OF FEBR':=}UP\u00a7Y', \n\nBEFORE\n\nTHE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE Ls'|\\}'A'R.AYANA\u00a7\\T'T'A\u00a7?|Y'\u00ab7 \n\nREGULAR FIRST APPEAL |\u00a7}Q.E\":3.5z8 OE_2.Q'G3~. \" A\n\nBETWEEN:\n\nSR1 B.XAVIER A  \nSON OF RBENJAMIN  ~  *\n\nAGED A_BOU~T':'6<'i$'.;:YEA.R'S;VVE'A 'A    \n\nNo.15\/6, AcEiuTH{AR,A'v..A MUDALIAR ROAD,\nFRAZER TOW|\\;,xj--._*   ' -\nBANGALORE A 5V6'0AjV~005,"' \n\n "   \ufb02 2  :APPELLANT\n\n L (BY'ERZIIA.V.(\ufb01A'NG..A.DHARAPPA, ADV.)\n\n1%.? 'EA"ASMTEKHEAMARUNNISA,\n W=iFEvOF LATE NARASHEED,\nAGED ABOUT 55 YEARS\n\n  "f:{,v.___.A'"'A.RAFIQ AHMED,\n\n'A SON OF LATE N.A.RASHEED,\nAGE MAJOR,\n\n\n\nSALIM AHMED,\nSON OF LATE N.A.RASE-IEED,\nAGE MAJOR,\n\nFAROOQ AHMED,\nSON OF LATE N.A.RASHEED,\nAGE MAIIOR,\n\nIRSHAD AHMED,   _\nSON OF LATE N.A.RASHEED.,_ \nAGE MAJOR,   \n\nSMT.SE-IABEENA,   \nD\/O LATE N.A.RfASHE\u00abED_,'A  _ \nAGE MAEOR,  '  I\nRIYAL AHIVIED,   _  I \nSON OE' LATE N';A.iRASHEED;\u00abI\u00bb\n\n '     I\n\nMS.'EARIZA,-".,--\u00ab\u00bb._ra    .\nD\/O LATE N ,A;\u00abRjASH.EED,.I\nAGE MAJOR, %    \n\nA,LiCI_'VA*R.E RESIDING AT\nN----O.5fG, M.,OORE"'ROOAD, CIVIL STATION,\n\nIRIAZERIITCIWN,\n\n   .\u00a3_3AI'\\*.GAE'OFgE_i.~ 560 005.\n\n: RESPONDENTS<\/pre>\n
(Ev. SRITCHALAPATHY AND SR1 SRINIVAS, ADVS.<\/p>\n
 .. ,F_.OR”R’1 A 8)<\/p>\n
  _ “‘._T’Rr’~’A FILED WS 96 RM ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF<\/p>\n
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE<\/p>\n
-\u00abD:”I”;10~1~O3 PASSED IN O.S. NO.2535\/86 ON THE FILE<\/p>\n
I<\/p>\n
 it  ‘The facts in E)<\/p>\n
OF THE IX ADDL. CITY CIVEL 8: SESSIONS JUDGE,
\nBANGALORE CITY, CCH l\\lO.2, DISMISSING THE SUIT
\nFOR DECLARATION AND MANDATORY INJUNCTION<\/p>\n
ETC., ,
\nTHIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEA.R4DVV’:”44rA~lu\\l”D<\/p>\n
RESERVE FOR JUDGMENT AND COEViI|\\l_\u20aci.
\nPRONOUNCEMEN-T BEFORE THE CQVURT. Cfrjo4oAY–,<\/p>\n
coum oEL1\\\/ERED T5l5[\u00a78H_E)rl\u00a3\\\u00bb.\u00bbVN_G’: \ufb02 <\/p>\n
This appeal is filed, by the’-Cappel.l;ant~\u00bbgaliaiuntvltf’-.,L<\/p>\n
being aggrieved of the ju’cic’g:r*r3ent\ufb01a’n,ci”‘*clecreeVWdatecl
\n10.1.2003 passed  ix Additional<\/p>\n
City C~ivi’l’$z?S;es.s:z:iGi’1s”J’.o’dge,S “8a~ngalore City (CCH No.2)
\ndismiss-in’g’_ t’t:eTVTst’i’ir4t_O4:S—Algu.2535\/1986 which was filed<\/p>\n
for d_evclara”t\u00e9oVn,. mandatory injunction etc.,<\/p>\n
   parties to the proceedings would be<\/p>\n
reTe;\u00abr\u00e9dTST”‘.t\u00bbo ‘ahsivnper their ranking in the trial court for<\/p>\n
the\u00e9iiisake of conveniera .\n<\/p>\n
iii’ are as follows:\n<\/p>\n
the defendant. On failure of such an attempt to<\/p>\n
compromise the matter, the pia\u00e9ntiff fiied the suit.<\/p>\n
4. The defendant appeared and contesvtech|'”‘~rt.he<\/p>\n
suit by fiiing written statement. The <\/p>\n
denied purchase of the property b_y””*thfe.:”pla’%nt\u00a7ff’~ <\/p>\n
through sale deed executed byV’\u00bbCha’drni*aAi3_a’i.’@ <\/p>\n
He has deniedthe measure_rT’.~ents’ofiportEo’nA~\u00bb.i;\u00a7vl\u00ableged <\/p>\n
have been purchasedby thie..VVpia_int\u00a3_ff i.nd’ic.aAte.d in plan<\/p>\n
as BCDEGH. He has’dte’n’i’ed}Vthe’;encro_achment. He<\/p>\n
has pu’ti”‘u’p.t:?;;’onAs:f:e”uc’t–i.Q’n ‘E’n”th’:e entire portion 12′ x
\n30′. He:  he has acknowledged and<\/p>\n
admi_t_ted thef al.|eg\u00e9dV”\u00e9ncroachment and he has not<\/p>\n
..  ag”re{ed.”tto”lpay conipensation to the plaintiff. He is also<\/p>\n
  theitheory of compromise also. The plaintiff<\/p>\n
ha’s..no._.”n1a\u00a7$3ner of right, title or interest or possession<\/p>\n
 i..nVuc_resp~ect of the suit property. The defendant has<\/p>\n
‘”pVu’rc’hased the entire premises bearing No.50 from the<\/p>\n
 “legal heirs of late V G<Ranganathan Mudaliyar under<\/p>\n
registered sale deed dated 25.11.1976 measuring
\n90'.6" X 60'. The vendor's sale deed showed the
\nmeasurement of 60' X 90'.9". The husband of<\/p>\n
Bhagirathi Bari and Gangadhar bequeathed <\/p>\n
property in favour of their chrfdren <\/p>\n
measurements of the property_.a.s__60'_–'$<"9t3'f';,9"'; <\/p>\n
said property No.50 was o:r*4i\u00abgrn_'_ai~TVy <\/p>\n
Mohammed Abdui Azeez  who__ Vfai\/our""<\/p>\n
of Smt.Bhagirathi I3.a.E. undte'r:..a'– regrsterec'… sale deed<\/p>\n
dated 29.11.1929 and t_h'e"m.easu:rne.m.e'nts were shown<\/p>\n
as 6O7?_ x tg9o?;n\u00a7'f{.r1..tegt"the\u00ab.\u00a7at:e deed of Mohd. Abdui Azeez
\nSaheb dated  aiso showed the simikar<\/p>\n
destjrivption V"a'n.d__ measurements. Therefore, the<\/p>\n
rd'efehdA_ant1erajmed that the property No.50 measures<\/p>\n
9O'".=9".Vxu7T6:0Vfa:u' The scheduie of the saie deed dated<\/p>\n
9  also states that the property measures to<\/p>\n
 36'-4..\u00abatV"the garage and iumbar rooms. The tapered<\/p>\n
portion measures East tour\/Vest 12' and North to South<\/p>\n
36' which the piaintiff is rnistakeniy claiming as his
\nown property as described it as MNOP in the sketch.
\nThe defendant thus claims that the property<\/p>\n
purchased by him and in his possessionV.'i'..s'inVce<\/p>\n
25.11.1972 includes the suit property also._.I_:'Th~e_'V:-C:|a::;n"'\u00ab_
\nof the plaintiff has been lost by doctrine'o'f=pireys'crivptio.tn '*~ if
\nand adverse possession since ithe;'_"defenda~n:t <\/p>\n
predecessors in title have in hostiie lpos\u00a7sfess.ion off'<\/p>\n
the suit property ever sirice—\u00e93–.6".—192p;iIheii plaintiff<\/p>\n
has not made out th'e'%=;as'e..aifid prayed for<\/p>\n
dismissai of     '<\/p>\n
 'On  of the above pieadings of the<\/p>\n
 ipa'r"ti,es-,i._ythe..Ti*ial Court framed the foiiowing issues:<\/p>\n
 (1,._}" -Whether the plaintiff is the owner of the<\/p>\n
plaint schedule property?\n<\/p>\n
l<\/p>\n
(2) Whether the title of the suit property was
\nperfected by adverse possession by the
\ndefendant and his predecessor in titie?<\/p>\n
(3) Whether the defendant is entitl.e_d.:’_:”~for
\nCompensatory Costs? 9 in A4<\/p>\n
(4) What order and dec:r_ee,.__<\/p>\n
6. The plaintiff in support’-v.\u00abofi,’_’_hi~*_:-4,  <\/p>\n
PW–1 and got marked   “;The’-if<\/p>\n
defendants in suppo,.rt of th–oVi.r_i-ease e>{a’min.e\u00a7d DW–1<\/p>\n
and gvo’t”maij:l<ed:\u00a7i~:E~xs';l\u00a7'1'to""'"L}1'\u00e9l. The Trial Court on
\nconsidxering  was pleased to dismiss<\/p>\n
the suit lh'elding':–th'atV't'he plaintiff has failed to prove<\/p>\n
.'*.,.,.,hl\u00a7:,.,l;ltliB1arid defevndavnt has proved adverse possession<\/p>\n
 Aggrieved by the same, the<\/p>\n
pita-intiff  filed the present regular first appeai.<\/p>\n
it  7'".".I have heard the learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
'plaintiff, learned counsei for the respondents and<\/p>\n
perused the entire records. The learned counsel for
\nthe appellant submits that the sale deed of the
\nplaintiff along with plan clearly establish that the<\/p>\n
property purchased by the plaintiff is not in any"–way<\/p>\n
protruding on its eastern side and it <\/p>\n
property l\\lo.49H\/IS. The court below…_hV:a~~s.'v <\/p>\n
see that the property No.49:"H <\/p>\n
plaintiff is a larger portion..___ It  <\/p>\n
measurement shown in  is  It is
\nsubmitted that the 'r.\u00e9il'.'sA or ;Sm"ti;.l3ih:'ag'girathi bai could<\/p>\n
have sold  what Bhagirathi Bai had
\nto hersleligl  'purchased by the vnedor of<\/p>\n
thejgde.fendant\ufb02as: a rectangle shaped property<\/p>\n
\u00bb measuvfrinpg..:6~{_lf x 90' 9 inches and there is no metnion<\/p>\n
H"an\\;tlii'.h-gVf=.lVil<e tapering to 36' at the garage and<\/p>\n
 lumlberlrovoms. Therefore, the claim of the defendant<\/p>\n
A  thla't~\u00ab_.the suit property belongs to him does not stand<\/p>\n
'  to reasons. Therefore, the learned counsel submits<\/p>\n
l<\/p>\n
that the impugned judgmetn and decree are liabie to
\nbe SeE3\u00a7SCJ)dne'the contrary, the learned cotmsei for the<\/p>\n
respondents supports the judgment and c:i'\u00e92cree<\/p>\n
passed by the triai court and prays for <\/p>\n
suit.\n<\/p>\n
9. On the basis of the <\/p>\n
the sides, the point thatV,arjses\u00e9’for’~-my :con’.sidA’erat.E’onV”g<\/p>\n
is;\n<\/p>\n
 and decree passed by<\/p>\n
the triaidddcotsrt Vst.-=__fi’Ae,:rs’\u00ab.:t-a”*orn any iiiegaiity so as to call<\/p>\n
 ‘~ _ foi:’nte.crfe..renc\u00e9” b~,t…t\u00abh is Cou rt?”<\/p>\n
  answer to the above point is in the<\/p>\n
 negatiy\u00e9 for the fo||owing{easons.\n<\/p>\n
11<\/span><\/p>\n
11. The piaintiff ciaims titie on the disputed<\/p>\n
portion i.e., suit property contending that it formspart<\/p>\n
and parcei of property No.15 purchased by <\/p>\n
the saie deed dated 13.4.1982 from   <\/p>\n
per E><.P1. On the other hancifthe'de.fer"idAa_"riat_uc;lai'n'is\u00ab<\/p>\n
that his property No.15 is.ipurch'ase.d frond.\u00a73'hagi'ra'th'i"\u00bbw.V<\/p>\n
Bar' under the saie deed  2VO.1'1-V.1:9f76V.3'atHEx.D4
\nmeasuring 90.3\/4'   tapers on
\nthe Western side  33' in North
\nto South   ciaims that the<\/p>\n
suit  parcei of property No.50.\n<\/p>\n
Thereforeyuthye is; whether the suit property .<\/p>\n
 rnealsur’i~ng 1V2″‘\u00abEya_s__tA.to West and 33’ North to South<\/p>\n
‘fo’i’*ms–.p’a.rt..:o’F property No.15 (Northern portion of oid<\/p>\n
Co.n’soii.dat’jedf’property No.49H) purchased by plaintiff<\/p>\n
‘v._y\u00bbund’ervv”t’heV Saie deed E:x.P1 or whether is it the part<\/p>\n
parcei of property No.50 purchased by the<\/p>\n
5 defendant under the Saie deed dated 20.11.1975 at<\/p>\n
i<\/p>\n
lei<\/p>\n
E><.D13 and also in <\/p>\n
drawn by the Court Commissioner.\n<\/p>\n
the suit property is aiso show_n…..w_ith  in<\/p>\n
approved plan got prepared <\/p>\n
Ex.P12. The documentary -e:VidenAc.’e  “both ” V L’<\/p>\n
the parties in the form of _e’rig.ii_n–al”‘-\u00bba.nd r:ertifie\u00a7d copies
\nof the saie deeds and”c_V%;ir_r'”t   E><s.P1, P3,
\nP4, P5, P6, paired E:rxs.p;r:: page it crystai clear<\/p>\n
that  okd No.49H and<\/p>\n
prope'~:jty._ by one Rayappa and he<\/p>\n
sold bo't'i-.i4_'_the"prope\u00bb~r'ti'es4'adjoining each other under<\/p>\n
 thefgiaie deeVd"v-dat_e_d: 23.6.1920 in favour of one Mohd<\/p>\n
The copy of the Sale deed Ex.P7 is<\/p>\n
pro'd'uced.V–"ijbyi1'the piaintiff. The measurement shown<\/p>\n
there..in"\u00ab;_oF the property No.49H is 53 '\/2' in East to<\/p>\n
A  and 60' in North to South and that property No.9<\/p>\n
'   90 3\/4' in East to {Vest and 60' in North to South.<\/p>\n
'4<\/p>\n
accepted, the schedule property forms part of<\/p>\n
property bearing No.49|~i. But the piaintifi-j':'c:ia'L:n:r'i'oyt<\/p>\n
Claim property larger in extent in East  <\/p>\n
than 53 1\/2' at any point on the"Eastern':srdei:v"–:Tht'e-A<\/p>\n
DCEF portion marked in ExTV.P12':'d__urir)A.g <\/p>\n
PW–1, gives a clear impression that_V_ pitaitnttiff is
\nctaiming 12' x 33'  portion.\n<\/p>\n
When the totaiy measu_reniaVet.n_t fof~”t~h.e’\u00bb~:’.pVroperty bearing<\/p>\n
old E\\io.49i~i_v  W–est and 60′ North
\nto south, 11,hVe’T.fjtiiesttforatwttovf  portion beyond the area
\n53 1\/2′–._Ea._st  ‘portion of property No.49i-i<\/p>\n
does no\u00e9t’*a__rise.V” _fitt\u00bb~h\u00a7*v.e’yent if the disputed property<\/p>\n
 exteinding  North to South on the Eastern<\/p>\n
  to be part and parcel of Southern<\/p>\n
Dortion.’  V’ A<\/p>\n
A.  1’2.” PW–1 has admitted that his father was<\/p>\n
  ‘ea’rii’er tenant of the Northern portion of the property<\/p>\n
 for about 50 years and at that time, the suit<\/p>\n
“i<\/p>\n
‘i\u00e9<\/p>\n
deed E><.P13  support.  'the
\nmeasurement and descvriptf'o.n;_ found
\nby the Court  shown in
\nthe si<etch~_    <\/p>\n
  been conducted in
\nrespectiof ,.and the measurements and<\/p>\n
situati_on a'sth~e""spot position is described in<\/p>\n
 the ye'a"r"1f973–74. The same measurement<\/p>\n
 in favour of the defendant. It is<\/p>\n
aiso. ad__mitted in the evidence of PW–1 that before he<\/p>\n
pu,r_chaVs'ed the property he had copy of the saie deed<\/p>\n
y~_.'3o.f"property No.50 dated 25.11.1976. Therefore, it<\/p>\n
"Was within his knowiedge that the suit property was<\/p>\n
1<\/span><\/p>\n
I9<\/p>\n
than statutory period is undisputediy to the knowledge<\/p>\n
of piaintiff and his father and vendor of the <\/p>\n
Both the properties are adjoining to each.?_o’t’h”e_il..,:an;j_’_<\/p>\n
undisputediy the defendant a_n.c:l__his_-“‘v’e*n::cio’r”‘:vvereu<\/p>\n
having possession over the displtsted’ipropertfas” f:o’i.;.n’dj<\/p>\n
during CTS survey in 1973f+?;4zV_yitse’l’fr__  filed * if<\/p>\n
in 1986 though the p,.!aintiffi-pd.r_e.ha-sed ‘the-pr.o’\u00a7perty in
\n1982. Therefore, it ;_is “*:iVr;.:ferred that the<\/p>\n
defendant   by adverse<\/p>\n
possession~by:–riieinaEni\u00abn’V\u00a7vVi.’irvpossiession adverse and to
\nthe kinowze\ufb01jgei\u00abair\u00bbytiigipiaayiitiff, his father and his
\nvendonl*<\/p>\n
_;’17.. Fo’r.,the above reasons, it is clear that the<\/p>\n
  (:oli;;<tVl"i–has properly assessed the evidence on<\/p>\n
'ureVlc'.o.rdv"V"a'nd'A'.;;.Vreached to right conclusions. The<\/p>\n
 implognvedhtiudgmeht and decree passed by the Trial<\/p>\n
if  dismissirig the suit of the plaintiff does not call<\/p>\n
'  for any interference\ufb02by this Court. Hence the appeal<\/p>\n
:9<\/p>\n
is hereby d$nnssed. iioweverthe par\ufb01es shan bear<\/p>\n
th@n'omnacosts.\n<\/p>\n
akd*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court B Xavier vs Khamarunnisa on 6 February, 2010 Author: L.Narayana Swamy IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 5*” DAY OF FEBR’:=}UP\u00a7Y’, BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRJUSTICE Ls’|\\}’A’R.AYANA\u00a7\\T’T’A\u00a7?|Y’\u00ab7 REGULAR FIRST APPEAL |\u00a7}Q.E”:3.5z8 OE_2.Q’G3~. ” A BETWEEN: SR1 B.XAVIER A SON OF RBENJAMIN ~ * AGED A_BOU~T’:’6<'i$'.;:YEA.R'S;VVE'A 'A No.15\/6, AcEiuTH{AR,A'v..A […]<\/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-110227","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nB Xavier vs Khamarunnisa on 6 February, 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\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"B Xavier vs Khamarunnisa on 6 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-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=\"2010-02-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-07-26T13:36:41+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\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"B Xavier vs Khamarunnisa on 6 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-26T13:36:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1909,\"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\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010\",\"name\":\"B Xavier vs Khamarunnisa on 6 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-26T13:36:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"B Xavier vs Khamarunnisa on 6 February, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"B Xavier vs Khamarunnisa on 6 February, 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\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"B Xavier vs Khamarunnisa on 6 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-07-26T13:36:41+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\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"B Xavier vs Khamarunnisa on 6 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-26T13:36:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010"},"wordCount":1909,"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\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010","name":"B Xavier vs Khamarunnisa on 6 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-26T13:36:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-xavier-vs-khamarunnisa-on-6-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"B Xavier vs Khamarunnisa on 6 February, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/110227","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=110227"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/110227\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=110227"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=110227"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=110227"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}