{"id":124532,"date":"2003-08-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-08-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003"},"modified":"2017-02-07T03:06:34","modified_gmt":"2017-02-06T21:36:34","slug":"t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003","title":{"rendered":"T.D. Thomson vs Indian Overseas Bank on 14 August, 2003"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">T.D. Thomson vs Indian Overseas Bank on 14 August, 2003<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED: 14\/08\/2003\n\nCORAM\n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. MISRA\n\nWRIT PETITION.NO.17336 OF 2000\nand\nWMP.NO.31099 OF 2001\n\nT.D. Thomson                   ..  Petitioner\n\n-Vs-\n\n1. Indian Overseas Bank,\n   rep. by Chairman &amp; Managing Director,\n   763, Mount Road,\n   Chennai 600 002.\n\n2. J.K. Gupta,\n   Deputy General Manager,\n   Appellate Authority,\n   Indian Overseas Bank.\n   763, Mount Road,\n   Chennai 600 002.\n\n3. Rajkumar Moses,\n   Disciplinary Authority,\n   Inquiry Cell (PAD),\n   Indian Overseas Bank,\n   763, Mount Road,\n   Chennai 600 002.                     ..  Respondents\n\n\n        Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for  the\nissuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus as stated therein.\n\nFor Petitioner :  Mr.Perumbulavil Radhakrishnan\n\nFor Respondents :  Mr.A.L.  Somayaji,\n                Senior Counsel for\n                Mr.P.  Chandrasekaran\n\n:J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n<p>                The petitioner, an employee of Indian Overseas Bank, has filed<br \/>\nthis  writ  petition for quashing the order of dismissal dated 9.8.1999 passed<br \/>\nby the third respondent which has been confirmed by the second  respondent  by<br \/>\norder  dated 24.2.2000 and has sought for a further direction to reinstate him<br \/>\nwith all back wages.\n<\/p>\n<p>                2.  The petitioner was working as a clerk under the respondent<br \/>\nbank.  On 28.6.1997, charge sheet was issued  by  the  Deputy  Chief  Officer,<br \/>\nwhich is as follows :-\n<\/p>\n<p>         .  .  .  CHARGE SHEET:\n<\/p>\n<p>        It is reported that as an employee of the bank, while working as Clerk<br \/>\nat  our  Mount  Road  Branch,  you  have  committed certain acts and omissions<br \/>\nconstituting misconducts within the purview of  clauses  17.5,(d),  (e),  (f),\n<\/p>\n<p>(j),  17.7(a),  (b),  (c),  (d)  and  (j)  of  the Bi-partite Settlement dated<\/p>\n<p>14.12.66 between the bank and its workmen as amended up to date and para 17(i)<br \/>\nof circular memo ref.7 (f) 131 of  1994-95  dated  16.3.95  on  VI  Bi-Partite<br \/>\nSettlement and for which you are charge sheeted as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>        Statement of imputations of misconduct:\n<\/p>\n<p>        1.   During  the  years  1995 and 1996 you were in the habit of coming<br \/>\nlate to office and  further  absenting  yourself  unauthorisedly  from  office<br \/>\nduring  office  hours  without  obtaining  prior permission from the competent<br \/>\nauthority and thereby failed to discharge your duties and turn out  full  days<br \/>\nwork for  many days.  To quote a few instances, you have unauthorised absented<br \/>\nyourself from office on the  following  days,  after  signing  the  attendance<br \/>\nregister and gone without doing the allotted work\/a full days work.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.  During the period 22.7.96 to 30.7.96 you had signed the attendance<br \/>\nregister  and immediately left the branch without attending to any office work<br \/>\nand consequently branch had to  effect  wage  cut  for  the  above  period  of<br \/>\nunauthorised absence.\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.   Despite  counselling,  both orally and in writing several time by<br \/>\nbranch\/Regional Office, Madras (Metro) officials to  improve  your  punctually<br \/>\nand\/or  in  attendance  and  cautioning, you have not shown any improvement.<br \/>\nBut you continued to be wilful in committing the misconduct, again and again.\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.  Inspite of the branch advising\/explaining to you orally\/in writing<br \/>\nvide their letter dated 1.8.96 in clear terms their inability to consider your<br \/>\nrequest to sanction computer allowance, you entered into protracted and direct<br \/>\ncorrespondence with the Executives in this regard.\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.  When an office order dated 21.4.97 was served by allocating you to<br \/>\nDeposits department w.e.f.  23.4.97 you had asked for one days time to decide<br \/>\non the matter and further refused to sign the office order.    When  the  said<br \/>\noffice  order  was  again  served  on  you  on 23.4.97, you made the following<br \/>\nunwarranted\/uncalled for remarks in the office order :\n<\/p>\n<p>        accepted subject to and subsequent to payment of  computer  allowance<br \/>\narrears vide   my   claim   letter  dated  12.4.97  addressed  to  E.D.    and<br \/>\nclarification regarding your letter dated 1.8.96 issued to me in this regard<\/p>\n<p>and did not work in Deposits department but continued to work in the  previous<br \/>\ndepartment,  which  amounts  to wilful insubordination and disobedience of the<br \/>\nlawful and reasonable order of the management.\n<\/p>\n<p>        6.  You are in the  habit  of  writing  letters  directly  to  higher<br \/>\nauthorities  at  Regional Office and top managements at Central Office casting<br \/>\naspersions on and criticising the officials of the branch, Regional Office and<br \/>\nCentral Office and the bank without routing the same through  proper  channel.<br \/>\nThe  correspondences  initiated  by you as above quite frequently are uncalled<br \/>\nfor and unwarranted and incompatible with your position in the bank.  They are<br \/>\nagain found to be irrelevant\/ frivolous and vexatious.  The tone and tenor  of<br \/>\nthe  letters  are  inabusive offensive, sarcastic and insinuating language and<br \/>\nbereft of respect regard and politeness but designed to camouflage your  above<br \/>\nmisconducts.    They   are   observed   to   be   vexatious,   villifying  and<br \/>\noverbearing\/defiant in  their  nature  and  in  violation  of  Central  Office<br \/>\ncirculars.\n<\/p>\n<p>        7.   Despite-the  bank declining your request for permission to be one<br \/>\nof the co-trustees of St.  Josephs Educational Trust you had continued to  be<br \/>\na co-trustee of the aforesaid trust.<\/p>\n<p>                3.   On  receipt of the aforesaid charge sheet, the petitioner<br \/>\nwrote a letter to  the  Deputy  Chief  Officer\/  the  disciplinary  authority,<br \/>\ncalling  for  certain documents such as copies of Memo issued to various staff<br \/>\nmembers  regarding  punctuality  during  1995-96,   office   order   regarding<br \/>\nallocation  of  work  for officials and attendance register between 1989-1993.<br \/>\nHowever, the Chief Manager gave a reply that those documents  cannot  be  made<br \/>\navailable as  they  are  not  required  for  the purpose of the enquiry.  Even<br \/>\nthough the petitioner did not submit any  reply,  the  disciplinary  authority<br \/>\nconsidered necessary  to  inquire  into the truth of the allegations.  Enquiry<br \/>\nwas held and the Enquiry Officer  found  the  petitioner  guilty  of  all  the<br \/>\ncharges.   Subsequently,  an  order  of  dismissal  was  passed  by  the third<br \/>\nrespondent which has been confirmed in appeal by the second respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>                4.  The aforesaid order of dismissal has  been  challenged  in<br \/>\nthe writ petition by raising the following main contentions :-\n<\/p>\n<p>        (i)  The  documents called for by the petitioner having not furnished,<br \/>\nhe could not give a reply.  The petitioner had to remain absent to attend from<br \/>\nthe enquiry.  After 20 months of initiation of enquiry  proceedings,  list  of<br \/>\ndocuments\/witnesses was forwarded.\n<\/p>\n<p>        (ii)  The  person  who  was  listed  as  witness No.3 was subsequently<br \/>\nappointed as enquiry officer on transfer  of  the  previous  enquiry  officer.<br \/>\nAppointment  of  a  witness  as  enquiry  officer is against the principles of<br \/>\nnatural justice.\n<\/p>\n<p>        (iii) The second show cause notice was not served on the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>        (iv) Even assuming that the allegations  have  been  established,  the<br \/>\npunishment   of  dismissal  is  grossly  disproportionate  to  the  nature  of<br \/>\nmisconduct and cannot be sustained.\n<\/p>\n<p>        (v) The permission required under Section 33(2)(b) of  the  Industrial<br \/>\nDisputes Act having not been obtained, the order of dismissal is illegal.\n<\/p>\n<p>                5.   A  counter  affidavit  has  been  filed  on behalf of the<br \/>\nrespondents refuting the allegations.  It has been stated that  the  documents<br \/>\ncalled  for  by the petitioner are not relevant for the purpose of the enquiry<br \/>\nand therefore, not supplied.  Appointment of a person cited as  a  witness  is<br \/>\nnot ipso facto illegal and since such a person was not examined as witness, it<br \/>\ncannot be  said that principles of natural justice have been violated.  It has<br \/>\nbeen further stated that the  second  show  cause  notice  has  been  sent  by<br \/>\nregistered post  and  the  same  was  returned  unserved.    The  other  legal<br \/>\ncontentions have also been refuted.\n<\/p>\n<p>                6.  The documents which had been called for by the  petitioner<br \/>\nhave already  been  listed  earlier.    The  decision  refusing  to supply the<br \/>\ndocuments emanated from the Chief Manager and not from  the  enquiry  officer.<br \/>\nWhether  the  documents  are  relevant or not was to be decided by the enquiry<br \/>\nofficer and not by any other officer of the bank.   Some  of  the  allegations<br \/>\nrelate  to  absenteeism of the petitioner and if the petitioner wanted similar<br \/>\ndocuments in respect of other employees including the officials, it cannot  be<br \/>\nsaid that the documents were not necessary for the purpose of the disciplinary<br \/>\nproceedings.   Possibly,  the  petitioner  wanted  to  show  as  to  how other<br \/>\nemployees have been treated for similar irregularities.\n<\/p>\n<p>                7.  It is not disputed that Shri Rajkumar Moses, who has  been<br \/>\nsubsequently  appointed as enquiry officer in the transfer of previous enquiry<br \/>\nofficer, has been listed as a witness in the list of  witnesses  furnished  by<br \/>\nthe bank.  Even though such a person may not be having actual bias against the<br \/>\ndelinquent, legal  bias has to be inferred.  Appointment of a cited witness as<br \/>\nan enquiry officer must be taken to be illegal which vitiated the enquiry.\n<\/p>\n<p>                8.  It is not disputed that the second show cause  notice  has<br \/>\nnot been  served.  However, it is the plea of the respondents that second show<br \/>\ncause notice has been issued by registered post and had  returned  undelivered<br \/>\nas the  addressee  was  absent.   The materials on record, particularly letter<br \/>\ndated 22.8.1997, clearly indicate that the petitioner had intimated about  the<br \/>\nchange of  address.   Issuing second show cause notice in the previous address<br \/>\ncannot be held to be valid.   It  is  not  the  case  of  the  bank  that  the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner had  deliberately refused to accept the letter.  It was returned as<br \/>\nun-served due to the absence of the petitioner.  Therefore, in law, it must be<br \/>\ntaken that the second show cause notice has not been served.\n<\/p>\n<p>                9.  For these defects, which  obviously  have  prejudiced  the<br \/>\npetitioner,  the  disciplinary  action  taken against the petitioner cannot be<br \/>\nsustained and is liable to be quashed.  It would be open to the respondents to<br \/>\nappoint a fresh enquiry officer to hold the enquiry.  The question relating to<br \/>\nsupplying of copies of the documents called for by the  petitioner  should  be<br \/>\nexamined by the enquiry officer and a de novo enquiry should be held.\n<\/p>\n<p>                10.   In  view  of  the above conclusion, it is unnecessary to<br \/>\ndeal   with   the   other   two   contentions   namely,   relating   to    the<br \/>\ndisproportionateness  of  the  punishment  and  relating  to  applicability of<br \/>\nSection 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>                11.  Subject to the aforesaid observations, the writ  petition<br \/>\nis allowed.   No costs.  Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is<br \/>\nclosed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index :  Yes<br \/>\nInternet :  Yes<\/p>\n<p>dpk\/ksr<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.  Indian Overseas Bank,<br \/>\nrep.  by Chairman &amp; Managing Director,<br \/>\n763, Mount Road,<br \/>\nChennai 600 002.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.  J.K.  Gupta,<br \/>\nDeputy General Manager,<br \/>\nAppellate Authority,<br \/>\nIndian Overseas Bank.\n<\/p>\n<p>763, Mount Road,<br \/>\nChennai 600 002.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.  Rajkumar Moses,<br \/>\nDisciplinary Authority,<br \/>\nInquiry Cell (PAD),<br \/>\nIndian Overseas Bank,<br \/>\n763, Mount Road,<br \/>\nChennai 600 002.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court T.D. Thomson vs Indian Overseas Bank on 14 August, 2003 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 14\/08\/2003 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. MISRA WRIT PETITION.NO.17336 OF 2000 and WMP.NO.31099 OF 2001 T.D. Thomson .. Petitioner -Vs- 1. Indian Overseas Bank, rep. by Chairman &amp; Managing Director, 763, Mount [&hellip;]<\/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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-124532","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>T.D. Thomson vs Indian Overseas Bank on 14 August, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"T.D. Thomson vs Indian Overseas Bank on 14 August, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2003-08-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-02-06T21:36:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"T.D. Thomson vs Indian Overseas Bank on 14 August, 2003\",\"datePublished\":\"2003-08-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-06T21:36:34+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003\"},\"wordCount\":1549,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003\",\"name\":\"T.D. Thomson vs Indian Overseas Bank on 14 August, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2003-08-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-06T21:36:34+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"T.D. Thomson vs Indian Overseas Bank on 14 August, 2003\"}]},{\"@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":"T.D. Thomson vs Indian Overseas Bank on 14 August, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"T.D. Thomson vs Indian Overseas Bank on 14 August, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2003-08-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-02-06T21:36:34+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"T.D. Thomson vs Indian Overseas Bank on 14 August, 2003","datePublished":"2003-08-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-06T21:36:34+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003"},"wordCount":1549,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003","name":"T.D. Thomson vs Indian Overseas Bank on 14 August, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2003-08-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-06T21:36:34+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-d-thomson-vs-indian-overseas-bank-on-14-august-2003#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"T.D. Thomson vs Indian Overseas Bank on 14 August, 2003"}]},{"@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\/124532","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=124532"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/124532\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=124532"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=124532"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=124532"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}