{"id":11254,"date":"2009-07-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-07-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009"},"modified":"2014-04-17T13:33:49","modified_gmt":"2014-04-17T08:03:49","slug":"ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009","title":{"rendered":"Ayyappan vs Sheeba on 28 July, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Ayyappan vs Sheeba on 28 July, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCrl.MC.No. 1677 of 2009()\n\n\n1. AYYAPPAN, AGED 50 YEARS,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. SHIJU, AGED 20 YEARS,\n3. BIJU, AGED 19 YEARS,\n4. BINU, AGED 18 YEARS,\n5. SIVANAND, AGED 45 YEARS,\n6. RADHA, S\/O.SIVANANDAN,\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. SHEEBA, AGED 29 YEARS,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,\n\n3. STATE OF KERALA,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL\n\n                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR\n\n Dated :28\/07\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n             M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J.\n            --------------------------\n              Crl.M.C.No.1677 of 2009\n            --------------------------\n\n                       ORDER\n<\/pre>\n
    Petitioners are the accused in M.C.No.43\/2009<\/p>\n
on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate’s<\/p>\n
Court, Karunagappally. First respondent, the widow<\/p>\n
of deceased Sabu, son of the first petitioner,<\/p>\n
filed a petition under Section 12 of Protection of<\/p>\n
Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter<\/p>\n
referred to as ‘the Act’) before Judicial First<\/p>\n
Class Magistrate’s Court, Karunagappally. As per<\/p>\n
Annexure-A5     order     dated     4.5.2009     in<\/p>\n
C.M.P.No.4279\/2009, an interim protection order was<\/p>\n
passed under Section 23 of the Act. The order<\/p>\n
restrains petitioners 1 to 5 from causing any<\/p>\n
domestic violence against the first respondent and<\/p>\n
also from forcible dispossessing her from their<\/p>\n
residential building. On 15.5.2009,  F.I. Statement<\/p>\n
of the first respondent was recorded, wherein, it<\/p>\n
was alleged by the first respondent that after the<\/p>\n
CRMC 1677\/09             2<\/span><\/p>\n
interim protection order passed by the Magistrate,<\/p>\n
Sub Inspector of Police, Chavara Police Station<\/p>\n
took her and her daughter to the building and while<\/p>\n
they were residing in the building, on 13.5.2009,<\/p>\n
petitioners herein came there and scolded her and<\/p>\n
thereafter, on 15.5.2009, when she had gone to<\/p>\n
Kollam and returned back by 5 p.m., it was found<\/p>\n
that her articles from the house were thrown out in<\/p>\n
the courtyard and the house was locked. It is<\/p>\n
alleged    that said acts  were  committed  by  the<\/p>\n
petitioners    and therefore,  they  committed   an<\/p>\n
offence as provided under Section 31 of the Act.<\/p>\n
Annexure-A4 FIR and Crime No.320\/2009 of Chavara<\/p>\n
Police    Station were registered  and  are   being<\/p>\n
investigated. This petition is filed under Section<\/p>\n
482 of Code of Criminal Procedure originally for a<\/p>\n
relief to direct Sub Inspector of Police not to<\/p>\n
arrest the petitioners and later, got the relief<\/p>\n
portion amended incorporating a prayer for quashing<\/p>\n
the FIR.\n<\/p>\n
CRMC 1677\/09              3<\/span><\/p>\n
    2.      Learned counsel    appearing  for    the<\/p>\n
petitioners and first respondent and learned Public<\/p>\n
Prosecutor were heard.\n<\/p>\n
    3.      Learned counsel    appearing  for    the<\/p>\n
petitioners argued that though under Section 31 of<\/p>\n
the Act a breach of an interim protection order is<\/p>\n
liable for punishment provided therein, unless the<\/p>\n
order is served on the petitioners, they cannot be<\/p>\n
prosecuted for breach of the order. It was pointed<\/p>\n
out that as per    Protection of Women from Domestic<\/p>\n
Violence Rules, 2006, it is for the Protection<\/p>\n
Officer to serve the protection order passed under<\/p>\n
the Act on the petitioners and Annexures-A6(a) and<\/p>\n
A6(b) Form-VII notices issued by the Magistrate<\/p>\n
were served on the petitioners only on 17.5.2009<\/p>\n
and therefore, petitioners cannot be prosecuted for<\/p>\n
the acts allegedly committed prior to that date.<\/p>\n
It is, therefore, argued that continuation of the<\/p>\n
proceedings is only an abuse of process of the<\/p>\n
court. Learned counsel also pointed out that though<\/p>\n
CRMC 1677\/09              4<\/span><\/p>\n
Section 31 of the Act provides for punishment for<\/p>\n
breach    of  a  protection order  or  an   interim<\/p>\n
protection order, unless the sixth petitioner is a<\/p>\n
respondent in the proceedings before the Magistrate<\/p>\n
and a party to the interim protection order, she<\/p>\n
cannot be prosecuted for the offence under Section<\/p>\n
31 of the Act and in any case, prosecution as<\/p>\n
against the sixth petitioner is an abuse of process<\/p>\n
of court and is to be quashed. Learned counsel<\/p>\n
finally submitted that even if the case is not<\/p>\n
quashed, Magistrate may be directed to grant bail<\/p>\n
to the petitioners.\n<\/p>\n
    4. Learned counsel appearing for the first<\/p>\n
respondent pointed out that based on the documents<\/p>\n
produced by the petitioners, the case cannot be<\/p>\n
quashed.    It is pointed out that as per the F.I.<\/p>\n
Statement, first respondent was brought to that<\/p>\n
house by the Sub Inspector of Police, Chavara on<\/p>\n
6.5.2009 and till 13.5.2009, she was residing there<\/p>\n
and even if there was no personal service of the<\/p>\n
CRMC 1677\/09               5<\/span><\/p>\n
interim protection order, if the factum of the<\/p>\n
order was disclosed to the petitioners and they<\/p>\n
committed breach of the order, they are liable for<\/p>\n
punishment, as provided under Section 31 of the<\/p>\n
Act.   It   was   argued that  whether  the   interim<\/p>\n
protection order was served on the petitioners,<\/p>\n
before the case was registered or not, cannot be<\/p>\n
decided in this petition and can be decided only on<\/p>\n
evidence and therefore, in any case, it cannot be<\/p>\n
quashed.\n<\/p>\n
    5.     Annexure-A5 is an interim protection order<\/p>\n
passed under Section 23 of the Act.    Under Section<\/p>\n
31, if there is a breach of the protection order or<\/p>\n
the interim protection order by the respondents in<\/p>\n
that order, they are liable for punishment.         A<\/p>\n
protection order passed under Section 18 of the Act<\/p>\n
or an interim protection order passed under Section<\/p>\n
23, would come into effect on the date of the<\/p>\n
order. True, if it is not known to the petitioners,<\/p>\n
there cannot be a breach of the order, with the<\/p>\n
CRMC 1677\/09              6<\/span><\/p>\n
knowledge that they are thereby committing breach<\/p>\n
of the order.      The question whether petitioners<\/p>\n
were aware of the order and whether the interim<\/p>\n
protection order was served on the petitioners or<\/p>\n
not, before the date on which Annexure-A4 FIR was<\/p>\n
registered, cannot be decided in this petition<\/p>\n
filed   under   Section 482  of  Code  of   Criminal<\/p>\n
Procedure.    That is a matter to be considered by<\/p>\n
the Magistrate. Petitioners are entitled to agitate<\/p>\n
the question before the Magistrate.    Hence, based<\/p>\n
on the submission that Annexure-A5 order was not<\/p>\n
served    on  the petitioners, the  FIR  cannot   be<\/p>\n
quashed as sought for.\n<\/p>\n
    6.     But, as is clear from Section 31 of the<\/p>\n
Act, it is only the respondents in the order, who<\/p>\n
committed breach of the protection order or the<\/p>\n
interim protection order, who could be prosecuted<\/p>\n
for the said offence.   When Annexure-A5 order shows<\/p>\n
that sixth petitioner was not a party to the<\/p>\n
proceedings before the Magistrate and as she was<\/p>\n
CRMC 1677\/09               7<\/span><\/p>\n
not a respondent in Annexure-A5 order, she cannot<\/p>\n
be prosecuted for its breach under Section 31 of<\/p>\n
the Act.     Therefore, the case as against the sixth<\/p>\n
petitioner can only be quashed. Petitioners 1 to 5<\/p>\n
are entitled to raise all the contentions before<\/p>\n
the Magistrate.\n<\/p>\n
    7.      Learned   counsel   appearing   for   the<\/p>\n
petitioners then submitted that there may be a<\/p>\n
direction to the Magistrate to grant bail to the<\/p>\n
petitioners. To grant    bail or not is to be decided<\/p>\n
by the Magistrate. I find no reason to believe that<\/p>\n
Magistrate will not exercise the jurisdiction vest<\/p>\n
on him.     Petitioners are at liberty to surrender<\/p>\n
before the Magistrate and seek bail.          Learned<\/p>\n
counsel sought a further direction to consider the<\/p>\n
application for bail on the date of surrender<\/p>\n
itself.       I  find  no  reason  to   believe  that<\/p>\n
Magistrate will not consider it. Hence, no such<\/p>\n
direction is warranted.\n<\/p>\n
CRMC 1677\/09             8<\/span><\/p>\n
     Petition is allowed in part. Crime No.320\/2009<\/p>\n
of Chavara Police Station as against the sixth<\/p>\n
petitioner alone is quashed.\n<\/p>\n
28th July, 2009      (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge)
\ntkv<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Ayyappan vs Sheeba on 28 July, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Crl.MC.No. 1677 of 2009() 1. AYYAPPAN, AGED 50 YEARS, … Petitioner 2. SHIJU, AGED 20 YEARS, 3. BIJU, AGED 19 YEARS, 4. BINU, AGED 18 YEARS, 5. SIVANAND, AGED 45 YEARS, 6. RADHA, S\/O.SIVANANDAN, Vs 1. SHEEBA, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-11254","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAyyappan vs Sheeba on 28 July, 2009 - 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\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ayyappan vs Sheeba on 28 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-07-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-04-17T08:03:49+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\\\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ayyappan vs Sheeba on 28 July, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-04-17T08:03:49+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1089,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009\",\"name\":\"Ayyappan vs Sheeba on 28 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-04-17T08:03:49+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ayyappan vs Sheeba on 28 July, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Ayyappan vs Sheeba on 28 July, 2009 - 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\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ayyappan vs Sheeba on 28 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-07-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-04-17T08:03:49+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\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ayyappan vs Sheeba on 28 July, 2009","datePublished":"2009-07-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-04-17T08:03:49+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009"},"wordCount":1089,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009","name":"Ayyappan vs Sheeba on 28 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-07-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-04-17T08:03:49+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ayyappan-vs-sheeba-on-28-july-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ayyappan vs Sheeba on 28 July, 2009"}]},{"@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\/11254","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=11254"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11254\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11254"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11254"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11254"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}