{"id":121211,"date":"1982-07-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1982-07-19T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982"},"modified":"2016-02-22T20:27:21","modified_gmt":"2016-02-22T14:57:21","slug":"s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982","title":{"rendered":"S. Thrimoorthy Chettiar And Anr. vs The Deputy Tahsildar, Alwaye And … on 20 July, 1982"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
S. Thrimoorthy Chettiar And Anr. vs The Deputy Tahsildar, Alwaye And … on 20 July, 1982<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: AIR 1982 Ker 319<\/div>\n
Author: U Bhat<\/div>\n
Bench: U Bhat<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
  U.L. Bhat, J.   <\/p>\n
 1. The 1st petitioner, for the purpose of running a Dairy Farm, borrowed a sum of Rs. 50,000\/- from the 4th respondent-Bank by executing a promissory note and both the petitioners creating an equitable mortgage over certain items of immovable properties to secure the loan. The loan was to be repaid at the rate of Rs. 100\/-per day and should have been discharged by 5-6-1981. A part of the amount due<\/p>\n
was paid and there has   been   long   correspondence between the bank   and   the   petitioners as is seen from the documents    produced  by  the Bank.    Ultimately, the    Bank sought the assistance of the District Collector in getting  the  outstanding  money   recovered under the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act,  1968  (for    short    ‘the    Act’), taking advantage of the    Notification    SRO 797\/79 published    in    the    Kerala    Gazette No. 29 dated  17-7-1979 issued by the    Government of Kerala under Section 71  of the    Act. Under this notification,  it has been declared that the provisions of the Act shall    be applicable to the amounts due from any    person to any bank on account   of    any    loan advanced to such person by that    bank    for agriculture  or    agricultural    purposes.      Explanation (b) of the notification gives an inclusive  definition  of  the words  “agriculture” or “agricultural  purposes”  so  as to    include cattle  breeding and  dairy  farming.    The 1st respondent, Deputy Tahsildar,  Alwaye    who is evidently  in  charge  of    the    revenue    recovery proceedings, issued    demand    notices Exts. P2 and P3 to the petitioners    on    6-1-1982 under Section 34 of the   Act    calling    upon them to pay a sum of Rs.    36,258.60    being the arrears of Bank dues with future interest and bata due in respect of the notices within 10 days from the date    of    service    of    the notice and calling upon them to raise objections, if any, to the demand within the period specified.    Petitioners have filed the    present original petition under Article 226 of the Constitution  of India  challenging  the legality of these two notices.\n<\/p>\n
 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the provisions of the Act can be applied only to simple money loan and cannot be applied to secured loan so long as the security is not exhausted. It is further contended that the resort to provisions of the Act would go against the provisions of the Civil P. C. and Section 68 of the Transfer of Property Act and therefore the notification cannot be interpreted to apply to secured loans and if it is to be so interpreted, it is unconstitutional. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted that Exts. P2 and P3 notices do not contain the relevant particulars mentioned in Section 34 of the Act and therefore without anything more the notices are invalid.\n<\/p>\n
 3. There is no dispute that the loan was taken from the Bank for the purpose of Dairy Farming. The borrower is a dairy farmer and the purpose of loan is dairy farming. This will attract the Notification No. 797 of 1979, issued by the State Government under Section 71 of the Act. Section 71 empowers the Government by notification in the Gazette to declare, if they are satisfied that it is necessary to do so in public interest that the provisions of the Act shall be applicable to the recovery of amounts due from any person or class of persons to any specific institution or any class or classes of institutions and thereupon all the provisions of the Act shall be applicable to any such recovery.\n<\/p>\n
 4.   Learned  counsel   for    the    petitioners would  contend  that  any  notification    issued under Section 71 of the Act can relate   only to simple money loans and  not  to    secured loans.    The section itself does not    seek    to draw  any  distinction  between  loans    of one category or the other.    The reference in the section  is  to    “recovery    of    amounts    due from”, without limiting the same to recovery of    amounts    due    under    secured    (simple money)   loan.      Therefore    contention    that notified ion under Section  71  can apply    only  to simple money loans  does not  appear    to be sustainable.\n<\/p>\n
 5. There is another and more important reason to reject this contention. The main purpose of the Act is to provide machinery and procedure for recovery of public revenue. Section 3 of the Act itself declares that public revenue due on any land shall be the first charge on that land, the buildings upon it and on the produce thereof. In other words, public revenue, to provide machinery and procedure for the recovery of which the Act has been enacted, is a charge on land i. e., immovable property. To such charges Section 100 of the T. P. Act will squarely be attracted. Section 100 of the T. P. Act says, where immovable property of one person is by act of parties or operation of law made security or the payment of money to another and the transaction does not amount to a mortgage, the latter person is said to have a charge on the property; and all the provisions hereinbefore contained which apply to a simple mortgage shall, so far as may be, apply to such charge. Section 68 of the T. P. Act on which reliance is placed by the petitioner is certainly one of those provisions relating to simple mortgages which would necessarily apply to charges. Reading Section 3 of the Act along with Section 100 of the T. P. Act, it can be seen that public revenue is a charge on land or immovable property and for such a charge the relevant provisions of the T. P. Act will apply. It is to enable recovery of such public revenue that the Act itself has been enacted. In other words, it cannot be said that because public revenue is a charge on immovable property and the provisions of the T. P. Act provide for recovery of charged amounts through civil suits, the provisions of the Act cannot be applied. To accept such an argument would be to negate the very basis of the Act. The purpose of the Act is to enable the State to devise a simple, inexpensive and expeditious procedure to enable recovery of public revenue due to the State and to prevent a situation where the State is constrained to go through the tortuous process of civil litigation to recover public revenue dues. When this is the background and purpose of the Act, it is difficult to accept that what Section 71 enables is the issue of a notification only to enable recovery of simple money loans and not secured loans or that the notification attracts
\nonly simple money loans.\n<\/p>\n
 6.   I will now consider the argument based
\non the provisions of the Civil P. C. and Section 63 of the T. P. Act. Order 34 of the Civil P. C. deals with suits relating to mortgages of immovable property. According to Rule 4, in a successful suit for sale, the Court shall pass a preliminary decree for sale as laid down in that rule. Rule 5 deals with the final decree to be passed in such a suit for sale. Rule 6 states that where the proceeds of the sale are insufficient to pay the mortgage amount, the Court may pass a decree i. e., a personal decree, for the balance amount. Rule 14 states that when a mortgagee has obtained such a decree for mortgage money, he shall not be entitled to bring the mortgaged property to sale otherwise than by instituting a suit for sale in enforcement of the mortgage. These provisions, it is pointed out have been incorporated on repeal of Sections 90 and 99 of the T. P. Act. Besides these provisions, reference is also made to Section 68 (1) and (2) of the T. P. Act. Section 68 (1) states that the mortgagee has a right to sue for the mortgage money in the case mentioned therein and no others. Sub-section (2) states that where such a suit is brought under Clause (a) or Clause (b) of Sub-section (1) the Court may at its discretion, stay the suit and all proceedings therein until the mortgagee has exhausted all his available remedies against the mortgaged property or unless he abandons the security etc. <\/p>\n
 7. It is contended that these provisions exhaust the methods for recovery of secured loans and since these methods are prescribed by Central legislation, and    the    field    is already  occupied,  the  State  Legislature    has no    competence    to    enact    any    legislation which will go contrary to the Central legislation.    Item 6 of List III of Schedule VII of the Constitution refers    to    T.    P.    other    than agricultural  land  and registration    of    deeds and documents.    Item 3 of   this    list    deals with Civil  Procedure  including    all    matters included in the Code    of    Civil    Procedure, limitation and arbitration.    Item  14 of List II of this  schedule  takes    in    agriculture    and Item  30 takes in  money lending and money lenders;  relief of    agricultural    indebtedness. While there can be no doubt that Civil Procedure and Transfer of Property    could    be legislated  upon  by  the    Central    Legislature and  it had already so legislated   and    therefore  the  State Legislature  may not  be competent  to enact against  those  provisions,    it has to be seen that there is no such legislation  contravening  or impinging  on  the Central  legislation  occupying  the   field    already. It will  not be correct to say that the provisions of the Civil P. C. or of the T. P. Act referred  to above provide that the procedure or the  method  contemplated    therein    alone shall be followed or shall be followed always and that no other procedure or method can in  any contingency be followed for recovery of secured loans.    That is not the effect of the provisions of the Civil P. C.    or    of the T. P. Act.    Section 9 of this    Civil    P.    C. which is the key to the    Code    only    states that the Court shall have jurisdiction to try suits of a civil    nature    excepting    suits    of which  their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly  barred.    It is  this    section    which recognizes the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts to try suits of a civil nature.    This does not mean   that   where    the   subject-matter   of   a claim  could  be  brought  for decision  before a Civil Court by way of a    civil    suit,    any other remedy  open  to the    parties    shall be barred. Similarly the provisions of Order XXXIV of the Civil P. C. do not have the effect of declaring that mortgage money cannot be recovered   except  through   the   instrumentality of   a   Civil   Court.    These   provisions   have only one effect namely, to declare that when suits    are   filed    for   recovery    of   mortgage money, those suits will have to be disposed of in accordance  with the provisions of the Code   subject   to   the   rights   and   liabilities which     may     have     been     recognized     in Order    XXXIV.    I   state   this   because   learned counsel   for  the  petitioner  stated  that   Civil P. C. cannot be said to be laying down only the procedure.    Besides laying down the procedure, there may be provisions of the Code which    recognize    the    existence    of    rights and   liabilities   in   parties.    It   is   also    the enforcement   of   those   rights   and   liabilities which is to be regulated by the provisions of the  Code.    Similar  is   the  position  with  reference to Section 68 of the Transfer of Property Act.    Section 68 begins by saying “The mortgagee has  a  right to  sue for the  mortgaged money in the following cases  and  no others  …   ..   …”    The effect of  the section
\nis only that the right of suit, that is the right of approaching a Civil Court on the part of the mortgagee is regulated by the provisions of the section and nothing more. It does nut have the effect of declaring that if a mortgagee has right to recover the mortgaged money otherwise than through the instrumentality of the Civil Court, he cannot resort to those other methods or that when he resorts to other methods, he will be bound by the provisions of Section 68. That is because Section 68 applies only when he sues; where he does not sue, the provisions cannot be applied.\n<\/p>\n
 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the provisions of the Civil P. C. and the T. P. Act referred to above have vested certain rights in the mortgagee and those rights once vested in him by virtue of Central legislation cannot be taken away by any provisions of the State legislation or any notification issued by virtue of any provision in a State enactment. It is true that the provisions referred to above can be said if not to vest rights in a mortgagor or for that matter a mortgagee, at least to recognize certain rights in them. But, as already pointed out, these rights and liabilities are limited to the forum of a Civil Court and limited to the occasion of the parties approaching the Civil Court for remedies contemplated in these enactments. This cannot mean that neither the central legislature nor the state legislature can make any enactment providing for other remedies to parties to a mortgage; and this is precisely what has been done by Section 71 of the Act and by the State Government issuing a notification under Section 71 of the Act. I am not able to agree that this in any way contravence the provisions of the enactment passed by the Central legislature. There is no vice of unconstitutionality in the notification providing expeditious remedy to the banks in regard to certain types of loans.\n<\/p>\n
 9. The last argument is based on certain omissions in Exts. P-2 and P-3 notices. These notices mention the total amount due from the petitioners. The notices also provide<\/p>\n
sufficient time for payment or for raising objections. There are two defects pointed out in these two notices. One is that the manner in which amounts due has been arrived at is not explained and the other is the mention in the notices that the amounts were due for the year 1979-80. There can be no doubt that the mention of the year 1979-80 is an error. The purpose of Section 34 of the Act insisting on a notice of demand to be issued as explained in the decision of Damadoran Nair v. Travancore Devaswom Board (1961 Ker LJ 37) is to put the parties concerned in saving the tenure from sale, in possession of the knowledge of what really they will have to do, if they desire to save the tenure. It is difficult to accept that the borrowers in this case would have been misled either by the omission or the mistake in the notices. The 4th respondent has produced before this Court the correspondence which passed between the parties. There are at least two documents produced where the petitioners have accepted the correctness of the demand made earlier by the bank. One of them is Ext. R-5 where it has been confirmed that the balance due as on 2-7-1981 was Rs. 40,656,05. In Ext. R-10 the balance due as on 30-9-1981 has been confirmed. It is clear that the parties would certainly not have been misled by the mention of 1979-80 in Exts P-2 and P-3. It is true that the notices do not give the details but the details are within the knowledge of the petitioners as evidenced by Exts. R-5 and R-10. It is therefore dear that the defects in Exhibits P-2 and P-3 notices do not have the effect of prejudicing the petitioners nor will they have the effect of misleading them. Even accepting that there are defects. 1 am not satisfied that considering the conduct of the parties in keeping huge amounts in arrears, this is a fit case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution. The O. P. is dismissed but, under the circumstances, without costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court S. Thrimoorthy Chettiar And Anr. vs The Deputy Tahsildar, Alwaye And … on 20 July, 1982 Equivalent citations: AIR 1982 Ker 319 Author: U Bhat Bench: U Bhat ORDER U.L. Bhat, J. 1. The 1st petitioner, for the purpose of running a Dairy Farm, borrowed a sum of Rs. 50,000\/- from the […]<\/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-121211","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nS. Thrimoorthy Chettiar And Anr. vs The Deputy Tahsildar, Alwaye And ... on 20 July, 1982 - 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\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"S. Thrimoorthy Chettiar And Anr. vs The Deputy Tahsildar, Alwaye And ... on 20 July, 1982 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982\" \/>\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=\"1982-07-19T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-02-22T14:57:21+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=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"S. Thrimoorthy Chettiar And Anr. vs The Deputy Tahsildar, Alwaye And … on 20 July, 1982\",\"datePublished\":\"1982-07-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-22T14:57:21+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982\"},\"wordCount\":2630,\"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\\\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982\",\"name\":\"S. Thrimoorthy Chettiar And Anr. vs The Deputy Tahsildar, Alwaye And ... on 20 July, 1982 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1982-07-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-22T14:57:21+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"S. Thrimoorthy Chettiar And Anr. vs The Deputy Tahsildar, Alwaye And … on 20 July, 1982\"}]},{\"@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":"S. Thrimoorthy Chettiar And Anr. vs The Deputy Tahsildar, Alwaye And ... on 20 July, 1982 - 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\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"S. Thrimoorthy Chettiar And Anr. vs The Deputy Tahsildar, Alwaye And ... on 20 July, 1982 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1982-07-19T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-02-22T14:57:21+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":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"S. Thrimoorthy Chettiar And Anr. vs The Deputy Tahsildar, Alwaye And … on 20 July, 1982","datePublished":"1982-07-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-22T14:57:21+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982"},"wordCount":2630,"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\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982","name":"S. Thrimoorthy Chettiar And Anr. vs The Deputy Tahsildar, Alwaye And ... on 20 July, 1982 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1982-07-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-22T14:57:21+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-thrimoorthy-chettiar-and-anr-vs-the-deputy-tahsildar-alwaye-and-on-20-july-1982#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"S. Thrimoorthy Chettiar And Anr. vs The Deputy Tahsildar, Alwaye And … on 20 July, 1982"}]},{"@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\/121211","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=121211"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/121211\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=121211"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=121211"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=121211"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}