{"id":150015,"date":"2008-02-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-02-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008"},"modified":"2017-09-03T10:48:00","modified_gmt":"2017-09-03T05:18:00","slug":"sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008","title":{"rendered":"Sivan E.K. vs Mini on 8 February, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Sivan E.K. vs Mini on 8 February, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRP(Family Court) No. 32 of 2008()\n\n\n1. SIVAN E.K., AGED 39 YEARS,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. MINI, AGED 33 YEARS, W\/O.SIVAN,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL\n\n                For Respondent  :SMT.SANDHYA RAJU\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT\n\n Dated :08\/02\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n                                   R.BASANT, J\n\n                                ----------------------\n\n                             R.P.F.C.No.32 of 2008\n\n                          ----------------------------------------\n\n                  Dated this the  8th day of February 2008\n\n\n\n\n                                     O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
         This   revision   petition   is   directed   against   an   order   issued<\/p>\n
under Section 125 Cr.P.C to the petitioner to pay maintenance at<\/p>\n
the rate of Rs.600\/- per mensum to the claimant, admittedly his<\/p>\n
wife.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
         2.    Marriage   is   admitted.     Separate   residence   is   also<\/p>\n
admitted.     The   wife   contended   that   the   husband   is   living   in<\/p>\n
adultery.   The husband, in the course of his examination before<\/p>\n
court   as   RW1,   admitted   that   he   has   begotten   a   child   in   his<\/p>\n
relationship with one Usha who was a neighbour.  The allegation<\/p>\n
of illicit intimacy against the petitioner is thus admitted by him<\/p>\n
as RW1.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
         3.    The   petitioner   offered   that   he   is   willing   to   maintain<\/p>\n
the  wife on   condition  that she  lives   with  him.    He,  at the  same<\/p>\n
time, raised a contention that she is living in adultery.  He raises<\/p>\n
a   further   contention   that   the   claimant\/wife   is   not   a   woman<\/p>\n
unable   to   maintain   herself.     The   parties   went   to   trial   on   these<\/p>\n
contentions.     The  claimant   examined   herself  as  PW1.    A  doctor<\/p>\n
R.P.F.C.No.32\/2008                         2<\/span><\/p>\n
was   examined   as   PW2   to   prove   the   birth   of   the   child   for   the<\/p>\n
petitioner   in   the   said   Usha.     She   examined   another   witness   as<\/p>\n
PW3 on her side.  Ext.X1 was also marked on her side.<\/p>\n
       4.      The   petitioner   examined   himself   as   RW1.     The   child<\/p>\n
born  to  him  and  PW1   as  RW2  and   yet  another  witness  as RW3<\/p>\n
were   examined   in   an   attempt   to   prove   adultery.     The   learned<\/p>\n
Judge   of   the   Family   Court   came   to   the   conclusion   that   the<\/p>\n
claimant   has   succeeded   in   establishing   that   she   is   entitled   for<\/p>\n
maintenance   and   accordingly   proceeded   to   issue   the   impugned<\/p>\n
order   directing   payment   of   maintenance   from   the   date   of   the<\/p>\n
petition.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       5.      The   petitioner   claims   to   be   aggrieved   by   the<\/p>\n
impugned   order.     What   is   the   grievance?     The   learned   counsel<\/p>\n
for the petitioner has been heard in detail.   The learned counsel<\/p>\n
for   the   petitioner,   first   of   all,   contends   that   the   finding   that   he<\/p>\n
has an adulterous relationship with one Usha is not established<\/p>\n
satisfactorily.     Less   said   about   this   contention   the   better.     The<\/p>\n
petitioner   as   RW1   was   constrained   to   admit   in   the   course   of<\/p>\n
cross-examination   that   the   said   Usha   given   birth   to   a   child   of<\/p>\n
which   he   is   the   father.     In   the   light   of   that   admission,   this<\/p>\n
contention need not detain this court any further.<\/p>\n
R.P.F.C.No.32\/2008                     3<\/span><\/p>\n
      6.     Secondly,   it   is   contended   that   the   claimant\/wife   is<\/p>\n
living   in  adultery.    What   is  the   evidence?     The  learned   counsel<\/p>\n
for   the   petitioner   contends   that   the   petitioner   had   produced<\/p>\n
certain documents which would show that his wife used to write<\/p>\n
letters   to   some   young   men   in   the   neighbourhood.     The   wife<\/p>\n
denied   those   letters.     Those   letters   have   not   been   formally<\/p>\n
proved and the  petitioner, who produced those documents, was<\/p>\n
unable   to   formally   introduce   them   in   evidence   in   accordance<\/p>\n
with law.  How did he receive them?  From whose custody did he<\/p>\n
get   it?     All   questions   were   not   satisfactorily   explained.     He<\/p>\n
wanted   the   letters   to   be   sent   to   the   expert   for   scientific<\/p>\n
comparison.   The learned Judge of the Family Court indulgently<\/p>\n
allowed   the   said   request   also;   but   on   condition   that   the<\/p>\n
petitioner   must   pay   the   interim   maintenance   which   had   been<\/p>\n
directed   to   be   paid.     The   petitioner   challenged   that   order<\/p>\n
unsuccessfully   by   filing   a   writ   petition   before   this   court.<\/p>\n
Thereafter also he did not make the payments and therefore the<\/p>\n
letters   were   not   sent   to   the   expert.     No   attempt   was   made<\/p>\n
otherwise to formally introduce those letters into evidence.  RW3<\/p>\n
was   examined   to   prove   the   said   adulterous   relationship.     Even<\/p>\n
the   attempt   was   only   to   show   that   the   claimant\/wife   has   been<\/p>\n
R.P.F.C.No.32\/2008                      4<\/span><\/p>\n
talking to some young men of the neighbourhood.  That cannot at<\/p>\n
all be reckoned as even an attempt to prove adultery.   The said<\/p>\n
contention raised must also hence fail.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      7.     There   was   a   contention   that   the   claimant\/wife   is   not<\/p>\n
unable to maintain herself.  She tendered evidence as PW1.  It is<\/p>\n
by now trite that even the fact that the wife, after estrangement<\/p>\n
and separation, has been attempting to do some work to keep the<\/p>\n
body and soul together, is not a reason to come to a conclusion<\/p>\n
that   she   is  not  unable   to  maintain  herself.     There   is   significant<\/p>\n
absence of evidence to show that she is not a woman unable to<\/p>\n
maintain herself.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      8.     The   contention   is  raised   before   me  that  the   wife   has<\/p>\n
certain   bank   accounts   in   which   the   petitioner   had   deposited<\/p>\n
amounts   and   which   amounts   were   withdrawn   by   her.     No<\/p>\n
satisfactory   evidence   has   been   introduced   in   support   of   that<\/p>\n
contention.  The said contention must also hence fail.<\/p>\n
      9.     Lastly and finally it is contended that the quantum of<\/p>\n
maintenance awarded is excessive.   The amount ordered is only<\/p>\n
Rs.600\/- per mensum.   I need not discuss this issue any further.<\/p>\n
The amount ordered is hardly sufficient for the lady to keep body<\/p>\n
and soul together.   In any view of the  matter, the challenge  on<\/p>\n
R.P.F.C.No.32\/2008                        5<\/span><\/p>\n
the   ground   that   the   amount   ordered   is   excessive   must   also   be<\/p>\n
rejected.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       10.    It   is   impassionately   prayed   that   the   revision   petition<\/p>\n
may be  admitted.    To  consider   the  above   contentions,  I  believe<\/p>\n
that it will be harsh, nay cruel, to admit this revision petition and<\/p>\n
order   notice   to   the   petitioner   to   come   all   the   way   to   the   High<\/p>\n
Court, to engage a counsel and to contest the proceedings.   No<\/p>\n
worthwhile   contention   has   been   raised   before   me   which   can<\/p>\n
persuade   me   to   admit   this   revision   petition   and   extend   an<\/p>\n
unnecessary   and   vexatious   invitation   to   the   claimant\/wife   to<\/p>\n
come to this court to argue this revision petition.<\/p>\n
       11.    The   learned   counsel   for   the   petitioner   contends   that<\/p>\n
the   court   below   has   erred   grossly   in   directing   payment   of<\/p>\n
maintenance from the date of the petition.  The order must have<\/p>\n
been   only   to   pay   maintenance   from   the   date   of   the   order   of<\/p>\n
maintenance,   contends   the   learned   counsel   for   the   petitioner.<\/p>\n
The   maintenance   case   was   filed   as   early   as   in   2001   and   the<\/p>\n
petitioner   will   be   forced   to   face   a   huge   liability   now,   it   is<\/p>\n
contended.     The   learned   counsel   for   the   petitioner   draws   my<\/p>\n
attention to the stipulation of Section 125(2) Cr.P.C which states<\/p>\n
that the amount of maintenance shall be payable from the date of<\/p>\n
R.P.F.C.No.32\/2008                         6<\/span><\/p>\n
the   order   or   if   so   ordered,   from   the   date   of   the   application   for<\/p>\n
maintenance.     The   learned   counsel   for   the   petitioner   contends<\/p>\n
that   the   normal   rule   must   be   to   award   maintenance   from   the<\/p>\n
date of the order.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       12.    A   reading   of   the   impugned   order   clearly   shows   that<\/p>\n
though   an   interim   direction   for   payment   of   maintenance   was<\/p>\n
ordered, the petitioner had not complied with that order.  Such a<\/p>\n
petitioner   cannot   be   heard   to   contend   that   the   maintenance<\/p>\n
ordered should take effect only from the date of the order.  That<\/p>\n
will   be   conceding   a   premium   for   persons   who   successfully<\/p>\n
protract   the   proceedings   and   who,   with   impunity,   do   not   make<\/p>\n
payments of amounts ordered as an  interim  maintenance.   This<\/p>\n
contention cannot also succeed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       13.    It   follows   that   the   revision   petition   cannot   succeed.<\/p>\n
The same is dismissed.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                         (R.BASANT, JUDGE)\n\njsr\n\n\n                      \/\/ True Copy\/\/          PA to Judge\n\n\nR.P.F.C.No.32\/2008    7<\/span>\n\n\nR.P.F.C.No.32\/2008    8<\/span>\n\n\n         R.BASANT, J\n\n\n\n\n\n           C.R.R.P.No.\n\n\n\n\n\n              ORDER\n\n\n\n\n\n21ST DAY OF JULY 2006\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Sivan E.K. vs Mini on 8 February, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RP(Family Court) No. 32 of 2008() 1. SIVAN E.K., AGED 39 YEARS, … Petitioner Vs 1. MINI, AGED 33 YEARS, W\/O.SIVAN, … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL For Respondent :SMT.SANDHYA RAJU The Hon’ble MR. Justice R.BASANT 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-150015","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSivan E.K. vs Mini on 8 February, 2008 - 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\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sivan E.K. vs Mini on 8 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-02-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-03T05:18:00+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\\\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sivan E.K. vs Mini on 8 February, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-02-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-03T05:18:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1167,\"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\\\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008\",\"name\":\"Sivan E.K. vs Mini on 8 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-02-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-03T05:18:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sivan E.K. vs Mini on 8 February, 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":"Sivan E.K. vs Mini on 8 February, 2008 - 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\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sivan E.K. vs Mini on 8 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-02-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-03T05:18:00+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\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sivan E.K. vs Mini on 8 February, 2008","datePublished":"2008-02-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-03T05:18:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008"},"wordCount":1167,"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\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008","name":"Sivan E.K. vs Mini on 8 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-02-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-03T05:18:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sivan-e-k-vs-mini-on-8-february-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sivan E.K. vs Mini on 8 February, 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\/150015","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=150015"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/150015\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=150015"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=150015"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=150015"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}