{"id":133313,"date":"2008-04-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-04-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008"},"modified":"2019-02-05T06:52:43","modified_gmt":"2019-02-05T01:22:43","slug":"the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008","title":{"rendered":"The Branch Manager vs A.Sami Thevar .. 1St on 8 April, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">The Branch Manager vs A.Sami Thevar .. 1St on 8 April, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 08\/04\/2008\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA\n\nC.M.A.Nos.1258 to 1261 of 2007\nand\nM.P.(MD).Nos.2,2,2,2 of 2007\nand\nC.R.P.NOs.159 to 162 of 2006\nand\nC.M.P.Nos. 1504 to 1507 of 2006\n\nC.M.A.No.1258 of 2007\n\nThe Branch Manager,\nThe New India Assurance company Ltd.,\n30, Samiannan Pillayar Koil Street,\nVirudhunagar.                  .. Appellant\/\n                                  3rd Respondent\nVs\n\n1.A.Sami Thevar               .. 1st Respondent\/\n                                  Petitioner\n2.S.Muthu Karuppan\n3.A.Thirupathi Kannan          ..2 &amp; 3rd Respondent\/\n                                 Respondent 1 &amp; 2\n\n\n\nPrayer\n\nAppeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the\nJudgement and decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.13 of 2004 dated 10.02.2005, on the\nfile of the Motor Accident claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge) Aruppukottai.\n\n!For Appellant\t      \t... Mr.K.Elangovan\n^For RR1 and 2\t\t... No appearance\nFor Respondent No.3\t... Mr.K.Mahendran\n\nC.M.A.No.1259 of 2007\t\n\n#The Branch Manager,\nThe New India Assurance Company Ltd.,\n30,Samiannan Pillayar Koil Street,\nVirudhunagar.                   .. Appellant\n\nvs.\n\n$1.A.Azhagu                     .. Respondent\/\n                                   Petitioner\n\n2.S.Muthu Karuppan\n3.A.Thirupathi Kannan           .. Respondents\/\n                                   Respondent 1 &amp; 2\n\nPrayer\n\nAppeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the\nJudgement and decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.39 of 2004 dated 10.02.2005, on the\nfile of the Motor Accident claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge) Aruppukottai.\n\t\n!For Appellant\t      \t... Mr.K.Elangovan\n\n^For RR1 and 2\t\t... No appearance\n\nFor Respondent No.3\t... Mr.K.Mahendran\n\nC.M.A.No.1260 of 2007\n\n#The Branch Manager,\nThe New India Assurance company Ltd.,\n30, Samiannan Pillayar Koil Street,\nVirudhunagar.                  .. Appellant\/\n                                   3rd Respondent.\n\nvs.\n\n$1.K.Veerapathiran              .. Respondent\/\n                                  Petitioner\n2.S.Muthu Karuppan\n3.A.Thirupathi Kannan          .. Respondents\/\n                                  respondent 1 &amp; 2\t\t\n\nPrayer\n\nAppeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the\nJudgement and decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.40 of 2004 dated 10.02.2005, on the\nfile of the Motor Accident claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge) Aruppukottai.\n\t\t\n!For Appellant\t      \t... Mr.K.Elangovan\n\n^For RR1 and 2\t\t... No appearance\n\nFor Respondent No.3\t... Mr.K.Mahendran\n\nC.M.A.No.1261 of 2007\n\n#The Branch Manager,\nThe New India Assurance Company Ltd.,\n30,Samiannan Pillayar Koil Street,\nvirudhunagar.                 .. Appellant\/\n                                 3rd Respondent\n\nvs.\n\n$1.A.Pichai                   ..1st Respondent\/\n                                   petitioner\n\n2.S.Muthukaruppan\n3.A.Thirupathi Kannan         ..2 and 3rd Respondent\/\n                                 Respondent 1 &amp; 2\n\nPrayer\n\nAppeal filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the\nJudgement and decree passed in M.C.O.P.No.41 of 2004 dated 10.02.2005, on the\nfile of the Motor Accident claims Tribunal (Subordinate Judge) Aruppukottai.\n\n!For Appellant\t      \t... Mr.K.Elangovan\n\n^For RR1 and 2\t\t... No appearance\n\nFor Respondent No.3\t... Mr.K.Mahendran\n\n\n\nC.R.P.No.159  of 2006\n\n#The Branch Manager,\nThe New India Assurance Company Ltd.,\n30,Samiannan Pillayar Koil Street,\nVirudhunagar.                 .. Petitioner\/\n                                 3rd Respondent.\nvs.\n\n$1.P.Arumugam                 .. Respondent\/\n                                 Petitioner,\n2.S.Muthu Karuppan\n3.A.Thirupathi Kannan         .. Respondents\/\n                                 respondents 1 &amp; 2\n\nPRAYER\n\nPetition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the\npetition and order passed in M.C.O.O.No. 10 of 2004 on the file of the  Motor\nAccident Claims Tribunal (Sub Judge), Aruppukottai,  dated 10.02.2005.\n\n!For Petitioner      \t... Mr.K.Elangovan\n\n^For Respondent No.1\t... Mr.C.Tamilselvan\nFor Respondent No.2\t... No appearance\nFor Respondent No.3\t... Mr.K.Mahendran\n\nC.R.P.Nos.160  of 2006\n\n#The Branch Manager,\nThe New India Assurance Company Ltd.,\n30, Samiannan Pillayar Koil Street,\nvirudhunagar                  .. Petitioner\/\n\t                          3rd Respondent\n\nvs.\n\n$1.K.Katturaja                .. Respondent\/\n                                  Petitioner\n\n2.S.Muthu Karuppan\n3.A.Thirupathi Kannan         .. Respondents\/\n                                   Respondents 1 &amp; 2\n\nPRAYER\n\nPetition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the\npetition and order passed in M.C.O.P.No.11 of 2004  on the file of the  Motor\nAccident Claims Tribunal (Sub Judge), Aruppukottai,  dated 10.02.2005.\n\n!For Petitioner      \t... Mr.K.Elangovan\n\n^For Respondent No.1\t... Mr.C.Tamilselvan\nFor Respondent No.2\t... No appearance\nFor Respondent No.3\t... Mr.K.Mahendran\n\nC.R.P.Nos.161  of 2006\n\n#The Branch Manager,\nThe New India Assurance Company Ltd.,\n30, Samiannan Pillayar Koil Street,\nvirudhunagar                  .. Petitioner\/\n                            3rd Respondent\n\nvs.\n\n$1.S.Ponnusamy                .. Respondent\/\n                                  Petitioner.\n\n2.S.Muthu Karuppan\n3.A.Thirupathi Kannan         .. Respondents\/\n                                 Respondents 1 &amp; 2\n\nPRAYER\n\nPetition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the\npetition and order passed in M.C.O.P.No.12 of 2004  on the file of the  Motor\nAccident Claims Tribunal (Sub Judge), Aruppukottai,  dated 10.02.2005.\n\n!For Petitioner     \t... Mr.K.Elangovan\n^For RR1 and 2\t\t... No appearance\nFor Respondent No.3\t... Mr.K.Mahendran\n\n\nC.R.P.Nos.162  of 2006\n\n#The Branch Manager,\nThe New India Assurance Company Ltd.,\n30, Samiannan Pillayar Koil Street,\nvirudhunagar                  .. Petitioner\/\n\t                          3rd Respondent\n\nvs.\n\n^1.S.Chelliah                .. Respondent\/\n                                 Petitioner\n\n2.S.Muthu Karuppan\n3.A.Thirupathi Kannan        .. Respondents\/\n                                Respondents 1 &amp; 2\nPRAYER\n\nPetition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the\npetition and order passed in M.C.O.P.No.14 of 2004  on the file of the  Motor\nAccident Claims Tribunal (Sub Judge), Aruppukottai,  dated 10.02.2005.\n\n!For Petitioner      \t... Mr.K.Elangovan\n^For Respondent No.1\t... Mr.C.Tamilselvan\nFor Respondent No.2\t... No appearance\nFor Respondent No.3\t... Mr.K.Mahendran\n\n\n:COMMON JUDGMENT\n\n\tThese appeals are focussed as against the common Judgment and decrees\npassed in M.C.O.P.Nos. 13, 39,40,41,10,11,12 of 2004 dated 10.02.2005, on the\nfile of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Sub-Court), Pattukkottai.\n\n\t\n\t2. Heard both sides.\n\t\n\t3. The Tribunal vide common Judgement dated 10.02.2005 awarded\ncompensation in the M.C.O.P.s under the following sub-heads:\n(i)M.C.O.P.No.13 of 2004:\n\tFor Loss of Income \t\t-Rs.10,000\/-\n\tFor Permanent disability\t-Rs.50,000\/-\n\t\t\t\t\t-------------\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t\t\t\tTotal\t-Rs.60,000\/-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii)M.C.O.P.No.39 of 2004:\n<\/p>\n<p>\tFor Loss of Income \t\t-Rs.10,000\/-\n<\/p>\n<p>\tFor Permanent disability\t-Rs.40,000\/-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t\t\t\t\t&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-<br \/>\n\t\t\t\tTotal\t-Rs.50,000\/-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t\t\t\t\t&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>(iii)M.C.O.P.No.40 of 2004:\n<\/p>\n<pre>\tFor Fatal Injury   \t\t-Rs.25,000\/-\n\tFor Pain and sufferings\t\t-Rs. 5,000\/-\n\t\t\t\t\t-------------\n\t\t\t\tTotal\t-Rs.50,000\/-\n\t\t\t\t\t-------------\n\n\n(iv)M.C.O.P.No.41 of 2004:\n\tFor Loss of Income \t\t-Rs.10,000\/-\n\tFor Permanent disability\t-Rs.50,000\/-\n\t\t\t\t\t-------------\n\t\t\t\tTotal\t-Rs.60,000\/-\n\t\t\t\t\t-------------\n(v)M.C.O.P.No.10 of 2004:\n\tFor Injury        \t\t-Rs. 6,500\/-\n\t\t\t\t\t-------------\n\t\t\t\tTotal\t-Rs. 6,500\/-\n\t\t\t\t\t-------------\t\n(vi)M.C.O.P.No.11 of 2004:\n\tFor Injury        \t\t-Rs. 6,500\/-\n                \t\t        -------------\n\t\t\t\tTotal\t-Rs. 6,500\/-\n\t\t\t\t\t-------------\t\n(vii)M.C.O.P.No.12 of 2004:\n\tFor Injury        \t\t-Rs. 6,500\/-\n\t\t\t\t\t-------------\n\t\t\t\tTotal\t-Rs. 6,500\/-\n\t\t\t\t\t-------------\t\n(viii)M.C.O.P.No.14 of 2004:\t\t\t\t\n\tFor Injury        \t\t-Rs. 6,500\/-\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t-------------\n\t\t\t\tTotal\t-Rs. 6,500\/-\n\t\t\t\t\t-------------\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t4. Animadverting upon the liability fixed on the Insurance Company in<br \/>\ndirecting it to pay the compensation amount by the Tribunal in favour of the<br \/>\nclaimants the above appeals have been filed on various grounds; the gist and<br \/>\nkernel of them would run thus:\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe insurance policy did not cover the liability of passengers who<br \/>\ntravelled in the goods vehicle.  The Tribunal gave a categorical finding that<br \/>\nthe claimants were passengers in the vehicle, nonetheless it simply awarded the<br \/>\ncompensation on the sole ground that as per the policy the appellant Insurance<br \/>\nCompany received the premium for passengers.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. According to the appellant\/Insurance Company as per the Motor Vehicles<br \/>\nAct, the Insurance Company cannot be mulcted with liability to pay compensation<br \/>\nrelating to  passengers in the goods vehicle and only the owner of the vehicle<br \/>\nis liable to pay compensation.  Accordingly, the appellant  prays for<br \/>\nexonerating  the Insurance Company from the liability to honour the awards<br \/>\npassed in the above matters.\n<\/p>\n<p> \t 6. The point for consideration is as to whether the Tribunal was<br \/>\njustified in fixing the liability on the Insurance Company purely based on the<br \/>\nclause to the effect that it collected premium relating to non-fare paying<br \/>\npassengers?\n<\/p>\n<p>The point:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. Heard Both Sides.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8. The perusal of the common Judgment passed by the Tribunal would at once<br \/>\nmake the point clear that the Tribunal misdirected  itself by misreading the<br \/>\nrelevant clauses in the Insurance Policy.  No doubt in the Insurance policy it<br \/>\nis found incorporated that the Insurance Company received the premium relating<br \/>\nto non-fare paying passengers also.  The relevant clauses in the Insurance<br \/>\npolicy are extracted here under for ready reference:<br \/>\n&#8220;Driver coolies\/other Employees in<br \/>\nconnection with the operation &amp;\/or<br \/>\nmaintaining&amp;\/or unloading of Motor<br \/>\nvehicle, Endtt.17(2 Person(s))       -Rs.30\/-<\/p>\n<pre>\n\nPassengers other Than Drivers\n(6 Persons)                          -Rs.90\/-\n\nNon Fare Paying Non Passengers\nas per Endtt. 14(1 Person(s))        -Rs.50\/-\n\nADD: For increased third party\n     Property damage riskes.\n     Section II-I(ii)\n     Endtt. 70 unlimited Amt.        -Rs.75\/-\"\n \t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t  (emphasis supplied)\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t9.   The above clauses should be read by giving them due meaning attached<br \/>\nto them. The above endorsement in no way would convey the idea that any<br \/>\npassenger could travel in a goods vehicle and if there is any accident occurred<br \/>\nto him, the appellant\/Insurance Company should compensate him.  As such the<br \/>\nTribunal completely mis-understood the very gamut and scope of such clauses and<br \/>\nthat to ignoring the decisions of the Hon&#8217;ble Apex Court in this regard. My mind<br \/>\nis redolent with the decision of the Hon&#8217;ble Apex Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/564628\/\">National Insurance<br \/>\nCompany Limited v. Cholleti Bharatamma and others<\/a> reported in (2008) 1 Supreme<br \/>\nCourt Cases 423 wherein the previous decisions of the Hon&#8217;ble Apex Court  are<br \/>\nalso referred to.   As such passengers in a goods vehicle generally cannot claim<br \/>\nany compensation from the Insurance Company and the insurance company cannot be<br \/>\ninterpreted to be one extending its coverage to such passengers.  However, the<br \/>\naforesaid catena of decisions would clearly help the loadmen as well as the<br \/>\nowner of the goods travelling in the cabin apart from driver and cleaner to<br \/>\nclaim compensation from the Insurance Company.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10. In view of the clear legal position enunciated by the Hon&#8217;ble Apex<br \/>\nCourt in the   aforesaid decisions there could be no more hesitation on the part<br \/>\nof any Tribunal to  apply those dicta in a given case.  With this trite law in<br \/>\nmind, I proceed to analyse the circumstances involved in those cases.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11. Out of the total eight cases covered by  the common judgment, now in<br \/>\nC.R.P.No. 159 of 2006 (M.C.O.P.No. 10 of 2004), C.R.P.No. 160 of 2006<br \/>\n(M.C.O.P.No 11 of 2004), C.R.P.No.161 of 2006 (M.C.O.P.No. 12 of 2004) and<br \/>\nC.M.A.No.1258 of 2007 (M.C.O.P.No. 13  of 2004), the very petitions  filed by<br \/>\nthe claimants\/injured would clearly demonstrate and highlight that they<br \/>\ntravelled only as owners of the goods and not as load men.  In such a case it is<br \/>\napparent and obvious that the Tribunal should not have mulcted the Insurance<br \/>\nCompany with the liability, when in fact there was nothing to show that all the<br \/>\nfour persons travelled in the cabin of the lorry.  The decision of the Hon&#8217;ble<br \/>\nApex Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/564628\/\">National Insurance Company Limited v. Cholleti Bharatamma and<br \/>\nothers<\/a> reported in (2008) 1 Supreme Court Cases 423   would highlight the same.<br \/>\nHence, in such a case it is beyond doubt that relating to those four persons<br \/>\nviz., P.Arumugam, K.Katturaja, S.Ponnusamy and A.Sami Thevar only the owner of<br \/>\nthe goods are liable to pay compensation and not the Insurance Company.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12. Relating to the injured persons involved in C.M.A.Nos.1259 to 1261 of<br \/>\n2007 and C.R.P.No.162 of 2006, their claim petitions would clearly reveal that<br \/>\nthey as loadmen travelled in that lorry, which is admittedly a goods vehicle.<br \/>\nAs per the Insurance policy referred to supra those persons are very much<br \/>\ncovered by the insurance policy and the appellant Company cannot wriggle out of<br \/>\nits liability by taking one plea or other.  The Tribunal erroneously held that<br \/>\nthere was no evidence that they travelled as loadmen.  In matters of this nature<br \/>\nout of eight persons, when four persons have come forward with a clear case that<br \/>\nthey travelled only as the owners of the goods and the remaining four persons<br \/>\nhave come forward with the case that they travelled only as loadmen, the claim<br \/>\nof such loadmen could have  been believed by the Tribunal and accordingly<br \/>\nprocessed the matter.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tHence, in these circumstances I am having no hesitation in placing<br \/>\nreliance on the depositions of the injured claimants  as well as their averments<br \/>\nin  petitions that they travelled as load men and as per the Insurance policy<br \/>\nthe load men are covered  by it and the appellant\/Insurance Company  should pay<br \/>\nthe compensation for them.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn the result, C.M.A.No.1258 of 2007, C.R.P.Nos.159 to 161 of 2006 are<br \/>\nallowed to the extent that only the owner of the offending lorry should pay<br \/>\ncompensation to the claimants  and the Insurance Company is not liable to pay<br \/>\ncompensation to such claimants.   C.M.A.Nos.1259 to 1261 of 2007 and<br \/>\nC.R.P.No.162 of 2006 are dismissed.  Confirming the Tribunal&#8217;s Judgment in those<br \/>\nM.C.O.Ps.  In other aspects, the common judgment  of the Tribunal shall hold<br \/>\ngood.  No costs.  Consequently, connected M.Ps. are closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>pm\/smn<\/p>\n<p>To<br \/>\nThe Motor Accident Claims Tribunal<br \/>\n(Sub Judge), Aruppukottai.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court The Branch Manager vs A.Sami Thevar .. 1St on 8 April, 2008 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08\/04\/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA C.M.A.Nos.1258 to 1261 of 2007 and M.P.(MD).Nos.2,2,2,2 of 2007 and C.R.P.NOs.159 to 162 of 2006 and C.M.P.Nos. 1504 to 1507 of 2006 C.M.A.No.1258 of 2007 [&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-133313","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>The Branch Manager vs A.Sami Thevar .. 1St on 8 April, 2008 - 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\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Branch Manager vs A.Sami Thevar .. 1St on 8 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-02-05T01:22:43+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Branch Manager vs A.Sami Thevar .. 1St on 8 April, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-05T01:22:43+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1095,\"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\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008\",\"name\":\"The Branch Manager vs A.Sami Thevar .. 1St on 8 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-05T01:22:43+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Branch Manager vs A.Sami Thevar .. 1St on 8 April, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"The Branch Manager vs A.Sami Thevar .. 1St on 8 April, 2008 - 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\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Branch Manager vs A.Sami Thevar .. 1St on 8 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-02-05T01:22:43+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Branch Manager vs A.Sami Thevar .. 1St on 8 April, 2008","datePublished":"2008-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-05T01:22:43+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008"},"wordCount":1095,"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\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008","name":"The Branch Manager vs A.Sami Thevar .. 1St on 8 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-05T01:22:43+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-a-sami-thevar-1st-on-8-april-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Branch Manager vs A.Sami Thevar .. 1St on 8 April, 2008"}]},{"@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\/133313","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=133313"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/133313\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=133313"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=133313"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=133313"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}