{"id":118224,"date":"2010-07-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-07-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2"},"modified":"2014-11-14T23:33:32","modified_gmt":"2014-11-14T18:03:32","slug":"kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2","title":{"rendered":"Kottayam Tile Works Ltd Rep By … vs Joseph on 14 July, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Kottayam Tile Works Ltd Rep By … vs Joseph on 14 July, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nSA.No. 572 of 1994(B)\n\n\n\n1. KOTTAYAM TILE WORKS LTD REP BY DIRECTOR\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. JOSEPH\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.R.VENKETESH\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.ROY CHACKO\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice P.BHAVADASAN\n\n Dated :14\/07\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                         P. BHAVADASAN, J.\n              - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                        S.A. No. 572 of 1994\n             - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n             Dated this the 14th day of July, 2010.\n\n                                JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
           Defendants in O.S. 186 of 1981 before the<\/p>\n
Munsiff’s Court, Ettumanoor are the appellants.                          The<\/p>\n
parties and facts are hereinafter referred to as they are<\/p>\n
available before the trial court.\n<\/p>\n
           2.   The suit was one for declaration of title,<\/p>\n
recovery of possession and other consequential reliefs.<\/p>\n
The plaint schedule property consists of 5 cents in Sy.<\/p>\n
No.90\/3A and 9 cents in Sy. No.90\/3B. The plaintiffs are<\/p>\n
the grand children of one Thommen Ouseph. Thommen<\/p>\n
Ousheph had two children, Thommen and Ouseph, and<\/p>\n
both of them pre-deceased Thommen Ousheph.                               The<\/p>\n
plaintiffs are the children of Ouseph. Thommen Ouseph<\/p>\n
had executed a Will in 1947 in relation to his properties.<\/p>\n
A schedule property under the Will was allotted to the<\/p>\n
children of Thommen and B schedule was allotted to the<\/p>\n
plaintiffs. According to the plaintiffs, the plaint schedule<\/p>\n
S.A.572\/1994.                 2<\/span><\/p>\n
properties were allotted to them as per B schedule to the<\/p>\n
Will and it was also claimed that during the lifetime of<\/p>\n
Thommen Ouseph, he had given 14 cents to the defendant<\/p>\n
Company, which was engaged in the manufacture of tiles.<\/p>\n
Plaint item No.1 is the property obtained by the plaintiffs as<\/p>\n
per the Will and plaint itemNo.2 is the shed put up by the<\/p>\n
defendant.     The tile Company is no longer functioning.<\/p>\n
Therefore the property was demanded back.         Since the<\/p>\n
defendant was unwilling to return the property, the suit was<\/p>\n
filed.\n<\/p>\n
             3. The defendants resisted    the suit.     It is<\/p>\n
contended by the Company that the suit property is a<\/p>\n
portion of the property belonging to the Company comprised<\/p>\n
in Sy. No.90\/3A. The Company held an extent of 1.83 acres.<\/p>\n
The Company has been in possession of the property for<\/p>\n
over 60 years and the property lies within well defined<\/p>\n
boundary separating it from the neighbouring property. A<\/p>\n
portion of the property was acquired for the railway line and<\/p>\n
another portion for the Medical College. The balance extent<\/p>\n
S.A.572\/1994.                    3<\/span><\/p>\n
of property is in the absolute possession and enjoyment of<\/p>\n
the Company. They disputed the title of the plaintiffs and<\/p>\n
they also contended that the plaintiffs are not entitled to any<\/p>\n
relief. By way of caution, they also pleaded that in case it is<\/p>\n
found that the plaintiffs have title to the property, the same<\/p>\n
has been lost by adverse possession and limitation.<\/p>\n
             4. The trial court on an evaluation of the evidence<\/p>\n
found that the plaintiffs are not entitled to any relief and<\/p>\n
dismissed the suit. Plaintiffs carried the matter in appeal as<\/p>\n
A.S. 176 of 1986 before the District Court, Kottayam. The<\/p>\n
appellate court reversed the decree of the trial court and<\/p>\n
granted a decree and therefore the appeal.<\/p>\n
             5. It is unnecessary to go into the details of the<\/p>\n
case in the light of the order dated 20.2.2008 passed by this<\/p>\n
court on the basis of the submission made by the learned<\/p>\n
counsel for the parties on either side. It was submitted on<\/p>\n
behalf of the parties that the parties are prepared to settle<\/p>\n
the dispute on proper identification of the property covered<\/p>\n
by the registered deed.       It was submitted that since the<\/p>\n
S.A.572\/1994.                     4<\/span><\/p>\n
relevant documents were not available when the suit and<\/p>\n
the first appeal were pending and heard, the property could<\/p>\n
not be identified with respect to those deeds.<\/p>\n
             6. It was felt that for a just disposal of the appeal,<\/p>\n
proper identification of the property is necessary. This court<\/p>\n
directed the Munsiff’s Court, Ettumanoor to appoint an<\/p>\n
experienced Commissioner at the expense to be shared<\/p>\n
equally by the parties to identify the property covered under<\/p>\n
the registered assignment deed dated 27th Midhunam, 1092<\/p>\n
M.E. with the assistance of an experienced qualified<\/p>\n
Surveyor and to prepare a plan. After receiving the report,<\/p>\n
the court was directed to forward the same to this court.<\/p>\n
             7. It appears that in pursuance of the direction<\/p>\n
issued from this court, the Munsiff’s court, Ettumanoor<\/p>\n
appointed Adv. M. Shajahan as the Commissioner.               The<\/p>\n
Commissioner had submitted a report and plan. The report<\/p>\n
in detail narrates the procedure adopted for measuring the<\/p>\n
property.\n<\/p>\n
S.A.572\/1994.                   5<\/span><\/p>\n
             8. The Commissioner has adopted two methods<\/p>\n
for measuring the property. He has referred to the materials<\/p>\n
relied on and the procedure for measurement. There are<\/p>\n
two types of measurement and he narrated the details of<\/p>\n
both the measurements done by him and he has also shown<\/p>\n
the extent of property covered by the two measurements.<\/p>\n
The report shows that the court may accept any one of the<\/p>\n
measurements.\n<\/p>\n
             9. It seems that the plaintiffs have filed objection<\/p>\n
to the report. One of the grounds taken in the objection is<\/p>\n
that the measurement has not been done in accordance with<\/p>\n
Kerala Survey Boundaries Act, 1961. Another ground taken<\/p>\n
is that the suggestion of the Advocate Commissioner that 59<\/p>\n
Ares of property may be deducted from the extent of<\/p>\n
property available to the plaintiffs cannot be accepted.<\/p>\n
             10. Both the contentions have no basis at all. The<\/p>\n
commissioner has in detail in his report said about the<\/p>\n
methods adopted by him for measuring the property. He<\/p>\n
has also given in detail the authority on the basis of which<\/p>\n
S.A.572\/1994.                     6<\/span><\/p>\n
he adopted the mode of measurement. It is seen that the<\/p>\n
methods adopted are authentic and authoritative. There is<\/p>\n
no reason to discard the report. Equally without force is the<\/p>\n
second contention that 0.59 Ares should not be deducted<\/p>\n
from the extent of the property to be returned to the<\/p>\n
plaintiffs. The Commissioner has given reasons for the same<\/p>\n
and there is no reason to reject the same.\n<\/p>\n
             11. It is also interesting to note that the plaintiffs<\/p>\n
lay claim only to nearly 10 cents and also that the property<\/p>\n
so claimed by him has been identified by the Commissioner<\/p>\n
in the suit, which is evident from Ext.C1(a) plan.            The<\/p>\n
property in the possession of the defendants is shown in<\/p>\n
brown colour and it is DE plot. The extent comes to almost<\/p>\n
the extent now found by the Commissioner in the present<\/p>\n
report regarding the property that is available to the<\/p>\n
plaintiffs. In the light of these facts, there is no reason to<\/p>\n
reject the commission report dated 27.3.2008 filed before<\/p>\n
the Munsiff’s Court, Ettumanoor.\n<\/p>\n
S.A.572\/1994.                   7<\/span><\/p>\n
      In the result, in modification of the decree passed by<\/p>\n
the lower appellate court, the following decree is passed:<\/p>\n
             It is declared that the plaintiffs are entitled to<\/p>\n
recover plot shown as AGHB in the sketch prepared by the<\/p>\n
Commissioner in the report dated 27.3.2008 and they are<\/p>\n
entitled to recover the same from the defendants as prayed<\/p>\n
for in the plaint.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                           P. BHAVADASAN,
\n                                                JUDGE<\/p>\n
sb.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Kottayam Tile Works Ltd Rep By … vs Joseph on 14 July, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM SA.No. 572 of 1994(B) 1. KOTTAYAM TILE WORKS LTD REP BY DIRECTOR … Petitioner Vs 1. JOSEPH … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.P.R.VENKETESH For Respondent :SRI.ROY CHACKO The Hon’ble MR. Justice P.BHAVADASAN […]<\/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-118224","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nKottayam Tile Works Ltd Rep By ... vs Joseph on 14 July, 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\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kottayam Tile Works Ltd Rep By ... vs Joseph on 14 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2\" \/>\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=\"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-11-14T18:03:32+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\\\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kottayam Tile Works Ltd Rep By … vs Joseph on 14 July, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-11-14T18:03:32+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2\"},\"wordCount\":1102,\"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\\\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2\",\"name\":\"Kottayam Tile Works Ltd Rep By ... vs Joseph on 14 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-11-14T18:03:32+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kottayam Tile Works Ltd Rep By … vs Joseph on 14 July, 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":"Kottayam Tile Works Ltd Rep By ... vs Joseph on 14 July, 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\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kottayam Tile Works Ltd Rep By ... vs Joseph on 14 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-11-14T18:03:32+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\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kottayam Tile Works Ltd Rep By … vs Joseph on 14 July, 2010","datePublished":"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-11-14T18:03:32+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2"},"wordCount":1102,"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\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2","name":"Kottayam Tile Works Ltd Rep By ... vs Joseph on 14 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-11-14T18:03:32+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kottayam-tile-works-ltd-rep-by-vs-joseph-on-14-july-2010-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kottayam Tile Works Ltd Rep By … vs Joseph on 14 July, 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\/118224","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=118224"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/118224\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=118224"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=118224"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=118224"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}