{"id":129732,"date":"2011-07-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-07-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011"},"modified":"2017-10-23T20:45:25","modified_gmt":"2017-10-23T15:15:25","slug":"s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011","title":{"rendered":"S.Paramasivan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 July, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
S.Paramasivan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 July, 2011<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 15\/07\/2011\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR\n\nW.P.(MD)No.5980 of 2011\nW.P.(MD)No.5981 to 6003 of 2011\nand\nM.P(MD)Nos.1 of 2011 (in all petitions)\n\nW.P.(MD)No.5980 of 2011:\n\nS.Paramasivan\t\t\t... Petitioner\n                      \t\nVs.\n\n1.State of Tamil Nadu,\n   represented by its\n   Secretary to Government,\n   Housing Unit and Urban Development\n   Department,  Fort St.George,\n   Chennai - 600 009.\n\n2.The Chairman and Managing Director,\n   Tamil Nadu Housing Board,\n   Nandanam,\n   Chennai - 600 009.\n\n3.The Executive Engineer and\n   Administrative Officer,\n   Tamil Nadu Housing Board,\n   Tirunelveli Housing Unit,\n   Sivanthipatty Road,\n   Tirunelveli - 627 011.\t... Respondents\n\n\tPetition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for\nthe issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records\npertaining to the impugned demand notice in Letter No.R4\/VMC\/11 dated 13.03.2011\non the file of the respondent No.3 and quash the same as illegal and\nconsequently, direct the respondent No.3 to calculate interest on difference in\nland cost between the original tentative land cost and the final land cost from\nthe date of finalisation of land cost i.e. 13.03.2011.\n\n!For Petitioner\t...\tMr.T.Lajapathi Roy\t\n^For Respondents...\tMr.M.Govindan,\n\t\t\tSpecial Govt. Pleader for R.1\n\t\t\tMr.A.Kannan for R.2 and R.3\t\n* * * * *\n:COMMON ORDER\n\tW.P(MD)Nos.5980 to 6003 of 2011 have been filed to call for the records\npertaining to the impugned demand notice in Letter No.R4\/VMC\/11 dated 13.03.2011\nand 10.03.2011 in respective cases, on the file of the respondent No.3 and quash\nthe same as illegal and consequently, direct the respondent No.3 to calculate\ninterest on difference in land cost between the original tentative land cost and\nthe final land cost from the date of finalisation of land cost i.e. 13.03.2011\nand 10.03.2011 respectively.\n\n\t2. The petitioners in all these cases are allottees of the houses in\nV.M.Chatram Scheme at Tirunelveli.  The allotments were made during the period\n1996 - 1998 on payment of the tentative cost which includes land cost.  There\nwas an agreement between the petitioners - allottees and the respondent Housing\nBoard that they have to pay the final land cost as may be determined by the\nrespondent Housing Board at the appropriate time together with interest as\nagreed upon.\n\t3. The land which was acquired to promote the scheme was the subject\nmatter of proceedings for enhancement of compensation by the original land\nowners and therefore, the finalisation of the tentative cost got postponed for\nlong number of years.\n\n\t4. Thereafter, on 13.03.2011, the respondent Housing Board issued a notice\nto the petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.7430 of 2011 and the same reads as follows:\nLr.No.R4\/VMC\/11  \t\t\t\tDated:13.03.2011\nAccount No:- 6709000002\nTo\nThiru\/Tmt.GANESAN S A\nHouse No.2 Type MIG\nTNHB colony, V.M.Chatram, St.III, Ph.I,\nTirunelveli.\n\nSir\/Madam,\n\n\t\tSub:- TNHB - Tirunelveli Housing Unit - V.M.C.PH1-ST1-3- Outstanding\ndues - Intimation - Regarding.\n\t\tRef:- G.O.Ms.No.37 Hg&UD Dep.\n\t\t\tDated 14-02-2011\n\n\t1) I wish to inform that the house No.MIG - 2 at V.M.C.PH1-ST1-3 has been\nallotted to you on 7\/24\/1998.  The Government of Tamilnadu has given interest\nrelief on some heads based on the recommendations of the High Level committee as\nper the G.O.Ms.No.37 dated 14-02-2011.  The Final land cost of the scheme is now\nfinalized.\n\n\t2) Accordingly, the computer generated outstanding dues statement for the\nhouse is shown below.\n\t\nDemand (As per the G.O.37)\t\tCollection\nTentative Cost\t\t282800\t\tLumpsum\t\t0\nInterest\t\t96212\t\tMonthly \t0\n\t\t\t\t\tInstallment\nPenal Interest\t\t\t\tPenal Interest\t0\nMC\t\t\t5400\t\tMC\t\t360\nInterest (ID)\t\t0\t\tInitial Deposit\t0\nCapitalisation\t\t0\t\tBalance cost\t292718\nInterest \t\t0\t\tLand Cost\t0\nDifference in\t\t99870 \t\tCapitalisation\t0\nland cost\nInterest\t\t140304\t\t\nBalance cost\t\t0\nInterest\n\nTotal\t\t\t624586\t\tTotal\t\t293078\nOustanding dues\t\t331508\n\n\n\t3) You are requested to remit the above said amount of  Rs.331508\/- based\non the G.O., on or before 31-03-2011.\n\n\t4) You are informed that the above dues should be paid in one lumpsum\nwithin four months from the date of issue of G.O.  This relief will not be\nextended if you have not paid the dues on or before 13-06-2011.\n\n\t5) If any discrepancy over the statement, please come over to this office\nalong with original receipts and meet the undersigned during the working days\nfor reconciliation.\n\t\n\t6) Please avail this opportunity and settle the dues and collect the sale\ndeed.\n\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tSd\/K.Arumugam,\n\t\t\t\t\t\tExe.Engr&Admn.Officer.\n\n\/Forwarded by order\/\n\n\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\tAsst.Revenue Officer.\"\n\n*******\n<\/pre>\n
\t5. The similar notices were issued to all the allottees either on
\n10.03.2011 or on 13.03.2011 and the writ petitions have been filed challenging
\nthe demand notices of the third respondent primarily contending that the
\ninterest calculated and demanded by the respondent Housing Board on the
\ndifference in land cost should be based on the date when the final land cost was
\ndetermined and not from the earlier date, arbitrarily fixed by the respondent
\nHousing Board.  In other words, the interest should be calculated on and from
\nthe date when the final land cost was actually determined by the respondent
\nHousing Board i.e. 10.03.2011 or on 13.03.2011 respectively, the date of the
\nimpugned notice in each case and not from the earlier date.  Consequently, the
\npetitioners will have to pay lesser amount on account of interest on
\ndifferential land cost.\n<\/p>\n
\t6. In this regard, the petitioners rely upon the decision of the Division
\nBench of this Court in V.Muralidharan v. State of Tamil Nadu<\/a> reported in 2007
\nWrit L.R. 710,  more particularly to the findings in paragraphs 21 and 25, which
\nread as follows:\n<\/p>\n
\t“21. The question now to be decided is what is the period from which
\ninterest is payable both in respect of final land cost and capitalisation
\ncharge.  As for the period from which interest can be claimed is concerned, the
\nfinal determination of land cost was made on 21.5.2004 with effect from
\n31.12.2000 as per Board’s resolution and it is agreeable to the writ
\npetitioners\/allottees.  When the demand was made in March, 2001, the final land
\ncost did not reach a finality.  It came up for further consideration before the
\nauthorities from time to time and only before the Lok Adalat, the parties came
\nto an almost near agreement on the final cost.  Even thereafter respondents did
\nnot approve and finalise the land cost and it is only pursuant to the Board’s
\nresolution dated 21.5.2004, the final land cost was determined by the respondent
\nand demand notices have been issued from June, 2004.  The tenor of the notice
\ndated 10.6.2004 clearly states that the land cost and capitalisation cost should
\nbe paid within a particular date, failing which interest will be calculated.  It
\nis, therefore, clear that the demand itself is prospective.  The respondents
\nwanted to conclude the issue only after the Board’s resolution and such decision
\nhas been communicated in June, 2004 and thereafter.  Therefore, the liability of
\nthe allottees to pay interest would arise only in default of payment of the
\namount as demanded by the respondents in June, 2004 pursuant to the Board’s
\nresolution dated 21.5.2004.  So, the Department cannot charge interest from the
\ndate of allotment.  Eventhough logically interest should be charged depending
\nupon the date of service of notice, in order to avoid any unnecessary confusion
\nand complication in such matter, on the basis of the fair concession made by the
\ncounsel appearing for the petitioners\/allottees to the effect that interest can
\nbe charged from the date of Board’s resolution dated 21.5.2004, we make it clear
\nthat interest on the revised land cost as well as capitalisation charges would
\nbe payable with effect from 21.5.2004.  As already indicated the counsel
\nappearing for the petitioners have fairly conceded that interest can be charged
\nfrom 21.5.2004.  Therefore, the allottees are liable to pay the interest on and
\nfrom 21.5.2004.\n<\/p>\n
\t****<\/p>\n
\t25. In the result, all the writ petitions are disposed of with the
\nfollowing directions:-\n<\/p>\n
\t(a) The petitioners\/allottees will pay the final land cost at the rate of
\nRs.3,49,100\/- per ground with 5% nominal profit.  The actual amount determined
\nby the respondents in respect of each allottee shall be paid together with
\ninterest as per the rate set out in the agreement from 21.5.2004 till date of
\npayment.\n<\/p>\n
\t(b) The capitalisation charges will be determined for the period from the
\ndate when flat or house was made ready for occupation till date of allotment for
\noccupation and such amount will be indicated separately.  The interest on such
\namount will be payable from 21.5.2004.\n<\/p>\n
\t(c) If the respondents have not intimated the petitioners\/allottees about
\nthe capitalisation charges so far, it is open to the respondents to specify the
\namount as stated in clause (b) and demand the same with interest from 21.5.2004.
\n\tOn complying with the above directions and satisfying any other
\nrequirement as per law, the petitioners\/allottees, who have prayed for execution
\nof sale deeds in their favour, are entitled to get the sale deeds executed.  No
\ncosts.\n<\/p>\n
\tAt the time of pronouncement of the order, at request of the learned
\ncounsel appearing for the petitioners and also Mr.D.Verasekaran, learned counsel
\nappearing for the Housing Board, there will be a further direction that the
\nfinal determination will be done by the Housing Board within a period of six
\nweeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”\n<\/p>\n
\t7. The learned Counsel for the petitioners further relied upon the order
\nof the Honourable Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.1805 of 2007 dated 02.09.2008
\nin V.Muralidharan’s case referred to above, to state that the date on which the
\nBoard resolved to determine the final cost should be taken as a relevant date in
\nthis case also.\n<\/p>\n
\t8. The third respondent, on notice, filed a counter affidavit common for
\nall the writ petitions and contended that the Board’s resolution No.6.05 to 6.08
\nand 6.40 was passed on 03.02.2011 wherein the Scheme cost was finally decided.\n<\/p>\n
\t9. The learned Counsel for the respondents relied upon paragraph 14 of the
\nsaid resolution to state that the cut-off date fixed for calculating interest on
\nthe final land cost was taken as 31.08.1996 and the interest is calculated on
\nthe final land cost from that date.  He justified the calculation as above.\n<\/p>\n
\t10. The notice which is under challenge contains two parts. The first part
\nrefers to G.O.(Ms)No.37 dated 14.02.2011 and that G.O was issued for a limited
\nperiod of time granting the concessional rate of interest for the payment of
\ndifference in the land costs.  At this point of time, it is accepted by both
\nsides that G.O. is no more in force.  Insofar as the petitioners are concerned,
\nG.O.(Ms)No.37 dated 14.02.2011 is not resorted to as they do not fall within the
\nperiod specified. The second part is the calculation of interest on the
\ndifferential land cost as per the terms of the agreement and that is now
\ndisputed by the petitioners based on the finding of the Division Bench of this
\nCourt and the decision of the Honourable Apex Court referred to above.\n<\/p>\n
\t11. In view of the above, the only issue that has to be decided by this
\nCourt will be with regard to the relevant date for payment of interest towards
\ndifference in the land costs.\n<\/p>\n
\t12. In the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in V.Muralidharan
\nv. State of Tamil Nadu<\/a> reported in 2007 Writ L.R. 710, a similar claim was made
\nby the Housing Board to the allottees under the Ellis Nagar Housing Board
\nScheme.  Among other issues, the issue relating to payment of interest on
\ndifference in land cost was considered and in that decision, it was held that
\nthe relevant date for calculation of interest will be the date when the final
\ndetermination of the land cost was made i.e. 21.05.2004 based on the Board’s
\nresolution dated 31.12.2000 and the interest was directed to be paid from
\n21.05.2004 i.e. the date of final determination of land cost.\n<\/p>\n
\t13. When the matter was taken up on appeal to the Honourable Supreme
\nCourt, the issue relating to the relevant date above was modified to read as the
\ndate when the Board’s resolution was actually passed. In other words, instead of
\n21.05.2004, the day after the Board’s resolution i.e., 01.01.2011 was to be
\ntaken as the relevant date for payment of interest.  In that case, the Board’s
\nresolution was passed on 31.12.2000 and the Honourable Supreme Court fixed the
\nrelevant date for payment of interest as 01.01.2001. The present case is no
\ndifferent from V.Muralidharan’s case and the said decision will squarely apply
\nto the present cases insofar as interest on the difference in land cost.\n<\/p>\n
\t14. Drawing the same analogy to the present case, the Board’s resolution
\neven as per the counter affidavit and the copy of the resolution which has been
\nnow produced by the learned Counsel for the respondent Housing Board, is dated
\n03.02.2011 whereby the final land cost has been determined.\n<\/p>\n
\t15. In view of the decision of the Honourable Apex Court and the decision
\nof the Division Bench of this Court in V.Muralidharan’s case, relating to
\nallotment in the Ellis Nagar Housing Board Scheme which is similar to the
\npresent case, the interest  on the difference in the land cost shall be reckoned
\nfrom the date of Board’s resolution No.6.05 to 6.08 and 6.40 dated 03.02.2011.\n<\/p>\n
\t16. The impugned notices in all the writ petitions  insofar as they claim
\ninterest on the difference in the land costs from an earlier date, is set aside
\nand the respondent Housing Board is directed to rework the interest as per the
\nagreement on and from the Board’s resolution dated 03.02.2011 till the date of
\npayment.  Such exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from
\nthe date of receipt of a copy of this order.  Subject to the above, the
\nrespondents shall release the sale deeds if all other requirements are complied
\nwith.\n<\/p>\n
\t17. The petitioners are entitled to pay the other amounts as per the
\nnotices forthwith to avoid default or interest liability if any applicable.\n<\/p>\n
\t18. The writ petitions insofar as the petitioners are concerned, are
\npartly allowed as above.  Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions
\nare closed.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n
rsb<\/p>\n
To\n<\/p>\n
1.The Secretary to Government,
\n   State of Tamil Nadu,
\n   Housing Unit and Urban Development
\n   Department,  Fort St.George,
\n   Chennai – 600 009.\n<\/p>\n
2.The Chairman and Managing Director,
\n   Tamil Nadu Housing Board,
\n   Nandanam,
\n   Chennai – 600 009.\n<\/p>\n
3.The Executive Engineer and
\n   Administrative Officer,
\n   Tamil Nadu Housing Board,
\n   Tirunelveli Housing Unit,
\n   Sivanthipatty Road,
\n   Tirunelveli – 627 011.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court S.Paramasivan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 July, 2011 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15\/07\/2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P.(MD)No.5980 of 2011 W.P.(MD)No.5981 to 6003 of 2011 and M.P(MD)Nos.1 of 2011 (in all petitions) W.P.(MD)No.5980 of 2011: S.Paramasivan … Petitioner Vs. 1.State of Tamil Nadu, represented […]<\/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-129732","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nS.Paramasivan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 July, 2011 - 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-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"S.Paramasivan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-10-23T15:15:25+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=\"12 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-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"S.Paramasivan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 July, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-23T15:15:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1666,\"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\\\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011\",\"name\":\"S.Paramasivan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-23T15:15:25+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"S.Paramasivan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 July, 2011\"}]},{\"@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.Paramasivan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 July, 2011 - 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-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"S.Paramasivan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-10-23T15:15:25+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"S.Paramasivan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 July, 2011","datePublished":"2011-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-23T15:15:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011"},"wordCount":1666,"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\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011","name":"S.Paramasivan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-23T15:15:25+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-paramasivan-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-july-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"S.Paramasivan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 July, 2011"}]},{"@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\/129732","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=129732"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/129732\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=129732"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=129732"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=129732"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}