{"id":125701,"date":"2010-06-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-06-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010"},"modified":"2016-03-16T03:39:47","modified_gmt":"2016-03-15T22:09:47","slug":"a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010","title":{"rendered":"A.Raveendran vs Sudhakaran on 2 June, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
A.Raveendran vs Sudhakaran on 2 June, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRCRev..No. 257 of 2007()\n\n\n1. A.RAVEENDRAN, S\/O CHOYIKUTTY,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. SUDHAKARAN, S\/O APPU,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.P.MOHAMMED NIAS\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.T.R.RAVI\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM\n\n Dated :02\/06\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n        PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ.\n                   ----------------------------------\n\n                    R.C.R. No.257 of 2007\n\n                  ----------------------------------\n\n               Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2010\n\n\n                            O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
                            —————\n<\/p>\n
Pius C.Kuriakose,J.\n<\/p>\n
           Under challenge in this revision filed by the tenant<\/p>\n
is the order of eviction passed by the Rent Control Appellate<\/p>\n
Authority for the first time under Section 11(8) of Act 2 of<\/p>\n
1965. The petition schedule building is ground floor portion<\/p>\n
of a two-storied building. In the first floor portion, a tailoring<\/p>\n
business is being conducted and the need projected invoking<\/p>\n
Section11(3) was that in the ground floor portion a textile<\/p>\n
business is to be conducted.          The Rent Control Court on<\/p>\n
evaluating evidence that was adduced by the party came to<\/p>\n
the conclusion that the need projected under Section 11(3) is<\/p>\n
bonafide and that the tenant is not entitled for the protection<\/p>\n
of the provisos. Accordingly the order of eviction was passed<\/p>\n
under Section 11(3).      The ground which was prominently<\/p>\n
urged by the revision petitioner before the appellate authority<\/p>\n
was that on the fact situation which obtains in the case the<\/p>\n
RCR.257\/07
\n                                 2<\/span><\/p>\n
apposite ground for eviction if at all the need is bonafide is<\/p>\n
the ground under Section 11(8). This argument was raised<\/p>\n
since it had become evident that the tailoring business being<\/p>\n
conducted in the first floor was a joint venture of the husband<\/p>\n
and the wife and the proposed textile business was also<\/p>\n
expected to be conducted as a joint venture. Whatever that<\/p>\n
be, the above argument that the petition can lie under Section<\/p>\n
11(8) and not under Section 11(3) found favour with the Rent<\/p>\n
Control Appellate Authority. What the Rent Control Appellate<\/p>\n
Authority did was to accept the above argument and proceed<\/p>\n
to pass an order of eviction under Section 11(8) modifying the<\/p>\n
order of eviction which had been passed by the Rent Control<\/p>\n
Court under Section 11(3).\n<\/p>\n
     2.    In this revision under Section 20 various grounds<\/p>\n
have been raised and Sri.C.P. Mohammed Nias, learned<\/p>\n
counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that serious<\/p>\n
prejudice has been caused to the tenant by what was done by<\/p>\n
the Appellate Authority. The learned counsel argued that the<\/p>\n
revision petitioner was never called upon to defend a petition<\/p>\n
under Section 11(8).     Though the standards of bonafides<\/p>\n
required for succeeding in a petition under Section 11(8) may<\/p>\n
RCR.257\/07
\n                                3<\/span><\/p>\n
not be so stringent as in a case under Section 11(3), grounds<\/p>\n
under Section 11(3) and 11(8) are two independent grounds<\/p>\n
and the considerations including the aspects to be taken into<\/p>\n
account after findings are entered regarding bonafides of the<\/p>\n
need are different. If the revision petitioner had been called<\/p>\n
upon to defend a claim under Section 11(8), he would have<\/p>\n
certainly contended that even if the need is bonafide, the<\/p>\n
advantages which the landlord will gain will not outweigh the<\/p>\n
hardship which the tenant will sustain.       Since the Rent<\/p>\n
Control Petition was not under Section 11(8) the revision<\/p>\n
petitioner was not able to take up such a contention and much<\/p>\n
less adduce evidence regarding the hardship which the tenant<\/p>\n
will sustain. Strong reliance was placed by Mr.Nias on an<\/p>\n
unreported judgment of this court in RCR.340\/2005 and it was<\/p>\n
submitted that in the fact situation which obtains in the<\/p>\n
present case what the learned Appellate Authority should<\/p>\n
have been done was to dismiss the Rent Control Petition and<\/p>\n
not to allow the Rent Control Petition on a ground which had<\/p>\n
not been invoked.\n<\/p>\n
      3.   Meeting the arguments of Mr.Nias, Sri. T.R.Ravi,<\/p>\n
learned counsel for the landlord submitted that since the<\/p>\n
RCR.257\/07
\n                                 4<\/span><\/p>\n
Rent Control Court had passed an order of eviction under<\/p>\n
Section 11(3) and since the ultimate order passed by the<\/p>\n
Appellate Authority (the impugned judgment) is in favour of<\/p>\n
the respondent, the respondent is entitled to canvass for<\/p>\n
restoration of the order of eviction passed by the      Rent<\/p>\n
Control Court. According to Mr. Ravi, the apposite eviction<\/p>\n
ground which is available in the case of the landlord is the<\/p>\n
ground which was upheld by the Rent Control Court. In this<\/p>\n
context he would draw our attention to the pleadings and the<\/p>\n
evidence and also the findings entered by the Rent Control<\/p>\n
Court.\n<\/p>\n
     4.   We     have   anxiously    considered    the   rival<\/p>\n
submissions addressed at bar. We have gone through the<\/p>\n
Rent Control Petition and found that eviction has been sought<\/p>\n
for by the landlord specifically under Section 11(3). We also<\/p>\n
find from the impugned judgment that a clear finding has<\/p>\n
been entered by the learned Appellate Authority that the<\/p>\n
eviction petition is maintainable under Section 11(8) only.<\/p>\n
That finding, on re-appreciating the evidence appears to be a<\/p>\n
reasonable one.    In fact, it is evident that the tailoring<\/p>\n
business which is being conducted in the first floor is joint<\/p>\n
RCR.257\/07
\n                                  5<\/span><\/p>\n
business of the petitioner and his wife and the textile business<\/p>\n
which is proposed to be conducted is also a joint venture of<\/p>\n
the husband and wife. Textile business is proposed (it is<\/p>\n
discernible from the evidence) as some sort of an allied<\/p>\n
business to the on going business of tailoring. At any rate, we<\/p>\n
do not find any illegality, irregularity or impropriety as<\/p>\n
envisaged by Section 20 of Act 2 of 1965 about the finding of<\/p>\n
the Appellate Authority that the proper eviction ground to be<\/p>\n
invoked is sub-section (8) of Section 11.\n<\/p>\n
      5.    The question which now arises is whether the<\/p>\n
Appellate Authority was justified in ordering eviction under<\/p>\n
sub-section (8) of Section 11 taking the view that since the<\/p>\n
standards of bonafides to be established in a case under<\/p>\n
Section 11(8) are liberal, prejudice will not be caused to the<\/p>\n
tenant by ordering eviction under Section 11(8). True, the<\/p>\n
standards of bonafides are liberal in a case under 11(8) in<\/p>\n
comparison to a case under 11(3). But then 11(8) unlike 11(3)<\/p>\n
is qualified by the proviso to sub-section (10) of Section 11. It<\/p>\n
is trite that under the proviso to sub-section (10) of Section 11<\/p>\n
both the landlord and the tenant have burden of proof. The<\/p>\n
landlord will have to adduce evidence regarding the<\/p>\n
RCR.257\/07
\n                                 6<\/span><\/p>\n
advantages to be gained by the landlord and the tenant will<\/p>\n
have to adduce evidence regarding the hardships to be<\/p>\n
sustained by the tenant. In the instant case, the tenant was<\/p>\n
never called upon to defend       a case under 11(8).       The<\/p>\n
argument of Mr.Niyas that prejudice has been occasioned to<\/p>\n
the tenant by the order of eviction passed by the Rent Control<\/p>\n
Appellate Authority under sub-section (8) of Section 11 in the<\/p>\n
absence of pleadings is meritorious.       We are therefore<\/p>\n
inclined to interfere with the judgment of the Appellate<\/p>\n
Authority.\n<\/p>\n
      6.   We notice that the building in question is situated<\/p>\n
in a commercially very important point of          Calicut City<\/p>\n
Corporation.    The current rate of rent viz., Rs.250\/- per<\/p>\n
mensem was fixed about 10 years ago. This rate, as rightly<\/p>\n
submitted by Mr.T.R.Ravi, is far below the market rate. We<\/p>\n
feel that even as the Rent Control Court is reconsidering the<\/p>\n
case pursuant to this order the rent should be tentatively re-<\/p>\n
fixed.\n<\/p>\n
      7.   The result of the above discussion is as follows.<\/p>\n
      The impugned judgment is set aside. RCP.62\/2004 is<\/p>\n
remanded to the Principal Rent Control Court, Kozhikode.<\/p>\n
RCR.257\/07
\n                                 7<\/span><\/p>\n
That court is directed to permit the respondent to amend the<\/p>\n
pleadings in the Rent Control Petition.        If pleadings are<\/p>\n
amended the revision petitioner should be allowed to submit<\/p>\n
counter pleadings and parties shall be allowed to adduce<\/p>\n
whatever further evidence they want to. Rent is tentatively<\/p>\n
re-fixed with effect from 1.7.2010 at Rs.1000\/- per mensem.<\/p>\n
We make it clear that the above re-fixation is only tentative<\/p>\n
and will be subject to regular fixation of fair rent by the Rent<\/p>\n
Control Court upon motion by either of the parties if they<\/p>\n
want to. Rent Control Court will dispose of the RCP and pass<\/p>\n
revised order within five months of receiving copy of this<\/p>\n
order.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                          PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
                          C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
okb\/ksv<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court A.Raveendran vs Sudhakaran on 2 June, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RCRev..No. 257 of 2007() 1. A.RAVEENDRAN, S\/O CHOYIKUTTY, … Petitioner Vs 1. SUDHAKARAN, S\/O APPU, … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.C.P.MOHAMMED NIAS For Respondent :SRI.T.R.RAVI The Hon’ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE The Hon’ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM Dated […]<\/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-125701","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nA.Raveendran vs Sudhakaran on 2 June, 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\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"A.Raveendran vs Sudhakaran on 2 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-06-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-03-15T22:09:47+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"A.Raveendran vs Sudhakaran on 2 June, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-06-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-03-15T22:09:47+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1270,\"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\\\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010\",\"name\":\"A.Raveendran vs Sudhakaran on 2 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-06-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-03-15T22:09:47+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"A.Raveendran vs Sudhakaran on 2 June, 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":"A.Raveendran vs Sudhakaran on 2 June, 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\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"A.Raveendran vs Sudhakaran on 2 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-06-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-03-15T22:09:47+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"A.Raveendran vs Sudhakaran on 2 June, 2010","datePublished":"2010-06-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-03-15T22:09:47+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010"},"wordCount":1270,"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\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010","name":"A.Raveendran vs Sudhakaran on 2 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-06-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-03-15T22:09:47+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-raveendran-vs-sudhakaran-on-2-june-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"A.Raveendran vs Sudhakaran on 2 June, 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\/125701","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=125701"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125701\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=125701"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=125701"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=125701"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}