{"id":147108,"date":"2007-11-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-11-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007"},"modified":"2014-02-02T13:35:03","modified_gmt":"2014-02-02T08:05:03","slug":"r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007","title":{"rendered":"R.Manjula vs A.Ravi Kumar on 6 November, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">R.Manjula vs A.Ravi Kumar on 6 November, 2007<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n                              \n                      DATED : 06\/11\/2007\n                              \n                           CORAM:\n                              \n           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI\n                              \n                  C.R.P.(PD) No.2326 of 2007\n                              and\n                      M.P. No.1 of 2007\n                              \n\n\n\nR.Manjula\t\t..Petitioner\n\n\n         Vs.\n\n\nA.Ravi Kumar \t\t..Respondent\n\n\n\n      The  civil revision petition is filed against the fair\nand decreetal order dated 11.10.2006 passed in H.M.O.P.No.11\nof 2006 by the learned Principal Sub Court, Erode.\n\n\n\n          For Petitioner       : Mr.N.Kolandaivelu\n\n          For Respondent       : Mr.T.Murugamanickam\n\n\n\n                            ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>      Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.<\/p>\n<p>      2.  The respondent\/husband has filed H.M.O.P.No.11  of<\/p>\n<p>2006  on  the  file  of the Principal Sub Court,  Erode  for<\/p>\n<p>divorce  under Section 13(1)(b)(iii) of Hindu Marriage  Act,<\/p>\n<p>1955  on  the  ground that ever since the date  of  marriage<\/p>\n<p>which   took  place  at  Erode  and  thereafter,  when   the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner  and  the respondent went to United  States,  the<\/p>\n<p>wife  has  not  behaved in normal manner and  there  was  an<\/p>\n<p>abnormal behaviour always suspecting the husband. Therefore,<\/p>\n<p>stating  that  it  is due to the conduct of  the  wife,  the<\/p>\n<p>husband  developed  panic attack and he  had  to  undergo  a<\/p>\n<p>treatment in United States. According to him, the doctors in<\/p>\n<p>the  United States after testing the husband\/respondent have<\/p>\n<p>come  to a conclusion that the revision petitioner\/wife  was<\/p>\n<p>having &#8220;Paranoid Mental disorder&#8221; which forms part of mental<\/p>\n<p>disorder and she has physiatrics problems and therefore  she<\/p>\n<p>has  to be treated by a physiatrist. It is his further  case<\/p>\n<p>in  his  petition  that  he has taken  his  wife  to  Apollo<\/p>\n<p>hospital at Erode and the physiatrist has given his  opinion<\/p>\n<p>after   testing   her  and  found  that  the   wife\/revision<\/p>\n<p>petitioner is suffering from Paranoid Mental disorder.<\/p>\n<p>       3.The  wife\/revision  petitioner  has  filed  counter<\/p>\n<p>affidavit  in the H.M.O.P. denying the said allegation  made<\/p>\n<p>by  the  husband\/respondent against  her.  She  has  clearly<\/p>\n<p>stated  that it is not correct that the American doctor  has<\/p>\n<p>given  any medical report advising her to get treatment  for<\/p>\n<p>Paranoid Mental disorder.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>      4.  Pending H.M.O.P., the respondent\/husband has filed<\/p>\n<p>an application in I.A.No.277 of 2006 under Section 45 of the<\/p>\n<p>Indian  Evidence  Act with a prayer for a direction  against<\/p>\n<p>the petitioner herein to appear before the medical board  to<\/p>\n<p>be  constituted by the Court and to direct the medical board<\/p>\n<p>to   examine  the  petitioner&#8217;s\/wife  mental  and   physical<\/p>\n<p>disability  and  report the same. That  application  of  the<\/p>\n<p>husband\/respondent  was  allowed by  the  learned  Principal<\/p>\n<p>Subordinate Judge, Erode. Against which the wife  has  filed<\/p>\n<p>the present revision petition.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>      5.The contention of the learned counsel appearing  for<\/p>\n<p>the  petitioner  is  that the order of the  Court  below  in<\/p>\n<p>directing the petitioner to undergo medical test is  opposed<\/p>\n<p>to  law  especially  in  the circumstances  that  there  was<\/p>\n<p>absolutely no materials produced before the Court  to  prove<\/p>\n<p>prima facie that the revision petitioner was suffering  from<\/p>\n<p>mental  disorder.  He  would also submit  relying  upon  the<\/p>\n<p>judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court reported in 2005 11<\/p>\n<p>SCC  479  (RADHIKA GUPTA vs. DARSHAN GUPTA)  that  the  wife<\/p>\n<p>cannot be compelled to undergo such medical test and  it  is<\/p>\n<p>the option given to her.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>     6. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for<\/p>\n<p>the  respondent  would submit that if  really  the  revision<\/p>\n<p>petitioner is not having mental illness, by putting her  for<\/p>\n<p>medical  test, she is not any way going to be  affected  and<\/p>\n<p>therefore  according  to  him,  the  order  of  the  learned<\/p>\n<p>Principal  Subordinate  Judge,  in  directing  the  revision<\/p>\n<p>petitioner\/wife to undergo the medical test is  not  opposed<\/p>\n<p>to law.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>      7. A reference to the order of the learned Subordinate<\/p>\n<p>Judge   shows that the only reason assigned by the Court  to<\/p>\n<p>direct  the revision petitioner to undergo the test is  that<\/p>\n<p>by issuing such direction, the petitioner is not going to be<\/p>\n<p>affected.  On the other hand, the learned Judge has not even<\/p>\n<p>taken care to refer to the documents said to have been filed<\/p>\n<p>by  the  respondent\/husband along with  the  petition  which<\/p>\n<p>relates  to  the  medical certificate stated  to  have  been<\/p>\n<p>issued by the American Doctor stating that the wife\/revision<\/p>\n<p>petitioner is suffering from mental disorder. This is  apart<\/p>\n<p>from  the  fact  that it is not known as to  how,  when  the<\/p>\n<p>husband visited the doctor in the United States, the  doctor<\/p>\n<p>after  examining the husband, certified that  the  wife  was<\/p>\n<p>suffering  from  Paranoid mental disorder and  that  is  the<\/p>\n<p>reason for the shock that the husband had. In any event,  it<\/p>\n<p>remains a fact that the learned Principal Subordinate  Judge<\/p>\n<p>has  not  applied his mind at all in passing such  an  order<\/p>\n<p>which has certainly a far reaching effect in the life  of  a<\/p>\n<p>woman. It is true that the Honourable Supreme Court in  2005<\/p>\n<p>11  SCC 479 (RADHIKA GUPTA vs. DARSHAN GUPTA) has held  that<\/p>\n<p>in cases where the wife says herself to be medically tested,<\/p>\n<p>the  court  has no power to ask her to give evidence  before<\/p>\n<p>the medical examination and the option must be given to her.<\/p>\n<p>The  Honourable Supreme Court has laid down that  aspect  of<\/p>\n<p>law in the following manner;\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>               &#8220;6.  In  our opinion, in  law  the<br \/>\n         wife  has  an option to decide  in  what<br \/>\n         manner  she would oppose the  ground  of<br \/>\n         mental illness alleged against her.  The<br \/>\n         High  Court erred in directing that  she<br \/>\n         would  first give evidence on  affidavit<br \/>\n         as    her    examination-in-chief    and<br \/>\n         thereafter     appear     for     cross-<br \/>\n         examination.  The  proper  course  which<br \/>\n         ought  to have been adopted by the  High<br \/>\n         Court   was  to  allow  her  to  undergo<br \/>\n         medial  examination, if she so  desired,<br \/>\n         and  thereafter give her oral  evidence,<br \/>\n         if   she  so  liked  to  do.  The  rigid<br \/>\n         procedure  for  recording  evidence   as<br \/>\n         directed   by   the   High   Court    is<br \/>\n         unwarranted  in law and particularly  in<br \/>\n         matrimonial  proceedings of  the  nature<br \/>\n         where  the  wife has to face  charge  of<br \/>\n         her mental unfitness.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/p>\n<p>     The factual assertion in the above said case cannot fit<\/p>\n<p>to  the  fact of the present case. Nevertheless, it  remains<\/p>\n<p>the  fact that in such cases of medical test, the option  is<\/p>\n<p>given  to  the wife. The learned counsel appearing  for  the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner submitted that the learned trial Judge  ought  to<\/p>\n<p>have appreciate that by directing the wife to undergo such a<\/p>\n<p>medical  test on the basis of suspicion that she  is  having<\/p>\n<p>mental  illness which is certainly going to  tell  upon  her<\/p>\n<p>life. In view of the same, I am of the considered view  that<\/p>\n<p>the  order  of the learned Principal Subordinate  Judge,  to<\/p>\n<p>undergo the medical test, is opposed to law and it is  gross<\/p>\n<p>error  committed by the learned Principal subordinate Judge.<\/p>\n<p>The order of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge,  Erode<\/p>\n<p>made in I.A.No.277 of 2006 in  H.M.O.P.No.11 of 2006 is  set<\/p>\n<p>aside   and   the   civil  revision  petition   is   ordered<\/p>\n<p>accordingly.  Further  the  learned  Principal   Subordinate<\/p>\n<p>Judge, Erode is directed to take up the said application and<\/p>\n<p>pass appropriate orders after referring the certificate said<\/p>\n<p>to have filed by the respondent\/husband and after giving due<\/p>\n<p>opportunities  to  both parties, within a  period  of  eight<\/p>\n<p>weeks  from the date of receipt of a copy of this  order  No<\/p>\n<p>costs.  Consequently,  connected miscellaneous  petition  is<\/p>\n<p>closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>jikr<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court R.Manjula vs A.Ravi Kumar on 6 November, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 06\/11\/2007 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI C.R.P.(PD) No.2326 of 2007 and M.P. No.1 of 2007 R.Manjula ..Petitioner Vs. A.Ravi Kumar ..Respondent The civil revision petition is filed against the fair and decreetal order dated [&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-147108","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 v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>R.Manjula vs A.Ravi Kumar on 6 November, 2007 - 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\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"R.Manjula vs A.Ravi Kumar on 6 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-11-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-02-02T08:05:03+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"R.Manjula vs A.Ravi Kumar on 6 November, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-11-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-02-02T08:05:03+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1136,\"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\\\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007\",\"name\":\"R.Manjula vs A.Ravi Kumar on 6 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-11-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-02-02T08:05:03+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"R.Manjula vs A.Ravi Kumar on 6 November, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"R.Manjula vs A.Ravi Kumar on 6 November, 2007 - 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\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"R.Manjula vs A.Ravi Kumar on 6 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-11-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-02-02T08:05:03+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"R.Manjula vs A.Ravi Kumar on 6 November, 2007","datePublished":"2007-11-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-02-02T08:05:03+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007"},"wordCount":1136,"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\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007","name":"R.Manjula vs A.Ravi Kumar on 6 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-11-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-02-02T08:05:03+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-manjula-vs-a-ravi-kumar-on-6-november-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"R.Manjula vs A.Ravi Kumar on 6 November, 2007"}]},{"@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\/147108","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=147108"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/147108\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=147108"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=147108"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=147108"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}