{"id":150337,"date":"2004-03-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-03-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004"},"modified":"2015-09-01T03:00:26","modified_gmt":"2015-08-31T21:30:26","slug":"k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004","title":{"rendered":"K. Krishnan vs Idol Of Sree Muniswaraswamy on 17 March, 2004"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">K. Krishnan vs Idol Of Sree Muniswaraswamy on 17 March, 2004<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED: 17\/03\/2004\n\nCORAM\n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M. CHOCKALINGAM\n\nSECOND APPEAL NO.1197 OF 1993\n\n1. K. Krishnan\n2. S.M.K.K. &amp; Co.\n   Through its Partner                          .. Appellants\n\n-Vs-\n\n1. Idol of Sree Muniswaraswamy\n   through its Trustees\n   A.P.Shanmugha Sundaramoorthy\n   and A.P.Shanmughanathan\n\n2. A.P.Shanmughasundaramoorthy\n3. A.P.Shanmughanathan\n4. Vallimuthu Nadar                                     .. Respondents\n\n\n        This second appeal is preferred under Section 100 of CPC  against  the\njudgment  and  decree dated 30.4.1993 made in AS No.104 of 1992 on the file of\nthe  learned  Principal  Subordinate  Judge,  Tiruchirapalli  confirming   the\njudgment  and  decree dated 6.3.1992 made in OS No.364 of 19 85 on the file of\nthe learned Principal District Munsif, Tiruchirapalli.\n\n!For Appellants :  Mr.P.Mani\n\n^For Respondents :  Mr.  T.R.Rajaraman\n\n:JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>        The defendants, who suffered with a decree in the hands  of  both  the<br \/>\ncourts  below in a suit for declaration, recovery of possession and for rental<br \/>\nbalance, have brought forth this second appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.  The short facts necessary for  disposal  of  this  appeal  are  as<br \/>\nfollows:\n<\/p>\n<p>        The  suit  property,  a thatched shed, which is resting on the eastern<br \/>\nwall of the plaintiff&#8217;s temple in Door No.1, Rengasamy Chettiar Street, Trichy<br \/>\nbelonged to the plaintiff&#8217;s temple.  The second plaintiff is  the  trustee  of<br \/>\nthe first  plaintiff temple.  The first and the second defendants have been in<br \/>\npossession as tenant from 1969 agreeing  to  pay  the  monthly  rental.    The<br \/>\npresent agreed  rent is Rs.135\/- per month.  There was a wilful default on the<br \/>\npart of the defendant in making the payment from 1.3.1982.  The arrears amount<br \/>\ndue for the said period till the filing of the suit was Rs.4,837.50  deducting<br \/>\nthe advance  of Rs.300\/-.  The first and the second defendants have sublet the<br \/>\npremises to the third defendant without the  consent  of  the  plaintiff.    A<br \/>\npresuit  notice  was issued terminating the tenancy, which resulted in a reply<br \/>\nnotice with false allegations denying the title of the plaintiff,  and  hence,<br \/>\nthere arose a necessity for filing the suit.\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.   The suit was resisted by the defendant mainly on two grounds that<br \/>\nthe suit property was a Government poramboke, and thus, the plaintiff was  not<br \/>\nentitled  for  the  relief  as  asked  for;  that  insofar  as the recovery of<br \/>\npossession, the tenancy agreement pleaded by the plaintiff was false and there<br \/>\nwas no landlord and tenant relationship between the parties,  and  hence,  the<br \/>\nsuit was to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.   The  trial  court  framed  necessary  issues,  tried the suit and<br \/>\ndecreed the same.  The appeal filed by the defendants was  also  dismissed  by<br \/>\nthe  first  appellate  court, and hence, this second appeal at the instance of<br \/>\nthe defendants.\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.  At the time of admission, the following substantial  questions  of<br \/>\nlaw were formulated by this Court for consideration:\n<\/p>\n<p>        1) Whether the courts below erred in law and misdirected themselves in<br \/>\ndeclaring that the suit property belong to the first plaintiff when admittedly<br \/>\nthe suit property is Government poramboke?\n<\/p>\n<p>        2) Whether the courts below erred in law and misdirected themselves in<br \/>\ncasting  the burden on the defendants to prove the negative that there existed<br \/>\nno tenancy when in law it is for the plaintiffs to prove their case  of  prior<br \/>\npossession and letting the defendants into possession by sufficient evidence?\n<\/p>\n<p>        6.   Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and also the learned<br \/>\ncounsel for the respondents on those contentions.\n<\/p>\n<p>        7.   As  seen  above,  the  plaintiff  temple  sought  the  relief  of<br \/>\ndeclaration and recovery of possession of the suit mentioned property alleging<br \/>\nthat  the  first  and  second  defendants, pursuant to an oral lease, got into<br \/>\npossession of the property agreeing to pay the monthly rental, and  they  have<br \/>\nbeen  paying  so, but there was a default on their part from 1.3.1982 till the<br \/>\nfiling of the suit, which amounted to Rs.4837.50; that after exchange  of  the<br \/>\nnotice, the su it was filed.\n<\/p>\n<p>        8.  The defence plea was twofold that the plaintiffs are not the owner<br \/>\nof the property, and there was no landlord and tenant relationship between the<br \/>\nparties.  In order to substantiate the case, the plaintiff, the trustee of the<br \/>\ntemple, was  examined  as P.W.1.  He has deposed that the property belonged to<br \/>\nthe temple.  There are so many tenants  including  the  plaintiffs;  that  the<br \/>\ndefendants  1  and 2 have been in possession of the property from 1969 onwards<br \/>\nand they have been paying rentals and the same has also been recorded  in  the<br \/>\nregisters maintained.    D.W.1,  on  the  contrary, has deposed that there was<br \/>\nneither any agreement of tenancy nor any payment of rental in  the  past,  but<br \/>\nthey encroached upon the Government poramboke from the year 1969 and they have<br \/>\nbeen running a jaggery business in the suit property.\n<\/p>\n<p>        9.   Admittedly,  the  suit  property  is a thatched shed abutting the<br \/>\ntemple wall and number of shops  are  situated  on  both  sides  of  shop,  in<br \/>\nquestion.   It  is  not  the case of the plaintiffs that there was any written<br \/>\nagreement between the parties, and hence, any agreement in  the  written  form<br \/>\ncould not  be  expected.  There are sufficient evidence to show that P.W.1 was<br \/>\nthe trustee and competent to give evidence  on  behalf  of  the  temple.    In<br \/>\nrespect  of  the  property, in question, B-Memos were served on the plaintiffs<br \/>\nand they have paid charges also, which were marked as Exs.P.34 to P.37,  which<br \/>\nstood in the name of the second plaintiff, who was shown as trustee of Kuttala<br \/>\nParameswari Temple.    In order to prove the payment of rental, the plaintiffs<br \/>\nhave relied on the ledger books maintained by the trustee, which  were  marked<br \/>\nas Ex.A.2 to A.33.  A scrutiny of the ledger books would clearly indicate that<br \/>\nthey were  maintained  regularly.   This Court is unable to see any reason why<br \/>\nthe account books relied on by the plaintiff has  to  be  rejected  or  to  be<br \/>\ndisbelieved.   On  the  contrary, the case of the defendants was that from the<br \/>\nyear 1969, they have been  in  possession  and  enjoyment  of  the  Government<br \/>\nporamboke,  but  not  even  one  scrap of paper has been placed to believe the<br \/>\nsame.  D.W.1 has, candidly, admitted that the rental payments, if made,  would<br \/>\nbe evidenced from the accounts books maintained by him.  The contention of the<br \/>\nappellants&#8217;  side  that  the  defendants  were  not called upon to produce the<br \/>\naccount books to prove contra cannot be accepted.  The settled proposition  of<br \/>\nlaw  is  that  in order to take a correct decision on a given issue, a duty is<br \/>\ncast upon both the plaintiffs and the defendants to assist the court.  But, in<br \/>\nthe instant case, when the defendants have admitted that they were maintaining<br \/>\nthe accounts, there could not be any impediment for them to produce the  same.<br \/>\nBut,  the plaintiffs have produced all the ledger books, wherein entries as to<br \/>\nthe payment of rental by the defendants has been clearly entered all along the<br \/>\nperiod.  This would be clearly  indicative  the  truth  of  the  case  of  the<br \/>\nplaintiffs.   B-memos  were obtained by the defendants only after the issuance<br \/>\nof the notice in the year 1982 by the plaintiffs.\n<\/p>\n<p>        10.  Under the  stated  circumstances,  both  the  courts  below  have<br \/>\nrecorded  a  concurrent  finding  that  the  defendants  was the tenant of the<br \/>\nplaintiffs.  Once the defendants are found to be the tenant of the  plaintiffs<br \/>\nlandlord,  they  were  estopped from questioning title of the plaintiffs as to<br \/>\nthe ownership.  This Court is unable to  notice  any  reason  to  disturb  the<\/p>\n<p>concurrent finding of both the courts below.\n<\/p>\n<p>        11.   In  the  result,  this  second  appeal  fails  and  the  same is<br \/>\ndismissed, leaving the parties to bear their costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index :  Yes<br \/>\nInternet :  Yes<\/p>\n<p>vvk<\/p>\n<p>To\n<\/p>\n<p>1.  The Principal Sub court, Tiruchirapalli\n<\/p>\n<p>2.  The Principal District Munsif, Tiruchirapalli\n<\/p>\n<p>3.  The Record Keeper, VR Section,<br \/>\nHigh Court, Madras<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court K. Krishnan vs Idol Of Sree Muniswaraswamy on 17 March, 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17\/03\/2004 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M. CHOCKALINGAM SECOND APPEAL NO.1197 OF 1993 1. K. Krishnan 2. S.M.K.K. &amp; Co. Through its Partner .. Appellants -Vs- 1. Idol of Sree Muniswaraswamy through its [&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-150337","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>K. Krishnan vs Idol Of Sree Muniswaraswamy on 17 March, 2004 - 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\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"K. Krishnan vs Idol Of Sree Muniswaraswamy on 17 March, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004\" \/>\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=\"2004-03-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-08-31T21:30:26+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\\\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"K. Krishnan vs Idol Of Sree Muniswaraswamy on 17 March, 2004\",\"datePublished\":\"2004-03-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-31T21:30:26+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004\"},\"wordCount\":1165,\"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\\\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004\",\"name\":\"K. Krishnan vs Idol Of Sree Muniswaraswamy on 17 March, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2004-03-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-31T21:30:26+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"K. Krishnan vs Idol Of Sree Muniswaraswamy on 17 March, 2004\"}]},{\"@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":"K. Krishnan vs Idol Of Sree Muniswaraswamy on 17 March, 2004 - 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\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"K. Krishnan vs Idol Of Sree Muniswaraswamy on 17 March, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2004-03-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-08-31T21:30:26+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\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"K. Krishnan vs Idol Of Sree Muniswaraswamy on 17 March, 2004","datePublished":"2004-03-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-31T21:30:26+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004"},"wordCount":1165,"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\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004","name":"K. Krishnan vs Idol Of Sree Muniswaraswamy on 17 March, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2004-03-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-31T21:30:26+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-krishnan-vs-idol-of-sree-muniswaraswamy-on-17-march-2004#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"K. Krishnan vs Idol Of Sree Muniswaraswamy on 17 March, 2004"}]},{"@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\/150337","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=150337"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/150337\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=150337"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=150337"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=150337"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}