{"id":15471,"date":"2009-11-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009"},"modified":"2018-09-06T05:52:16","modified_gmt":"2018-09-06T00:22:16","slug":"smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009","title":{"rendered":"Smt C S Gangamma vs Sri Puttaramaiah S\/O. Late … on 30 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Smt C S Gangamma vs Sri Puttaramaiah S\/O. Late … on 30 November, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: S.N.Satyanarayana<\/div>\n
IN THE men COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER \nBEFORE  j' % V\nTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE   \" \n\nCIVIL REVISION PETITION 1Vf0~4\/5I{ 'OE[20 (}9  \n\nBETWEEN:\n\nSMT.C.S.GANGAMMA,\nAged about 67 Years,\nD\/O Channappa and V\nW\/Oiate Puttaswamy,'  I  _  - \nR\/at Chikkenahlli R    \"   \nKasaba Hobli,   V    \u00bb\nChennapatna T aluk.--;j_57i :30  ._  \u00b0\n\nRAMANAGARAM A:1}IS'I'RIC'E,  '  .. PETITIONER.\n\n(By sn.N.s1IIiab;s.OIsI;as\u00a3\u00a7fy>,:%A\u00e9\u00a7r;R} []\"  %\n\nAND:\n\n ' \"\"\"\" ~ \"\nS'\/O Eats-., Subbeggwda,\nDead by   I _  '_.\n\n 3} sM\u00a7'.JAYAEIMA,\n\nAgekiabotit 56 Years,\n\n W\/O lat': Puttaramaiah.\n\n  Ab)   \n\nAged about 27 Years,\n\n%   S\/O Iate Puttaramaiah.\n\nW\n\n\n\nc) SMi'.SAVI'i'HA,\nAged about 24 Years,\nD \/ 0 late Puttaramaiah.\n\nd) SRLRAGHU,\nAged about 22 Years,\nD\/o late Puttaramaiah.   \n\nAll are R\/at Chikkenahalli\n\nVillage, Kasaba Hobli, .\n\nChennapatna Tq. 571 50},    '    \nRAMANAGARAM DISTRICT.  \n(Respondents -- Served)''~~,, 22 X 2   \n\ns=_=s=_'=s=VM__<..--'W'::.-_"=::_._V!,:%" J'\n\nThis p\u20actiti0'1f13__.:i4S':\u00ab:\ufb01ied iliflti\u00e9ii  of the Code of\nCivil Procedure;  .e"\u00a7\u00a7;*:;1ejigf1:\u00a7se1<;.t and Order dated\n12. 12.2008  No;-4-.6\/E2008 on the \ufb01le of the\nAdditional}   Rsmanagara, dismissing the\n\nExecution Petition. \n\n   petition.\u00bb  on Fina} Hearing this day, the\nCC-iirt  _\ufb021f3 ~fC1l0WH1g2\nO R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
 Thisz is\u00ab;_Decree Ho1der’s revision eha\ufb02enging the order<\/p>\n
 Execution Petition \ufb01led by him in Ex. Case<\/p>\n
 “fj-No.;4A6′;\/2(i06 on the fie of Additiona} Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.),<\/p>\n
2′  fiiariiiainagara, by an order dated 12.12.2008.<\/p>\n
V1<\/p>\n
2. The facts leading to this revision petition are as nnder: %<\/p>\n
The petitioner herein is purchaser of an extent oi”Vl.:”‘acre<\/p>\n
of agricultural land in Sy.No.80\/1 of Chikkenah’alli ~<\/p>\n
Kasaba Hobli, Channapatna Taluk, \u00a31-‘()”I”I’r~\u00ab0I1\u20acl_!  ll<\/p>\n
S\/o late Subbegowda under a Sale Deeci-ldated’ <\/p>\n
Initially, the said land was mortgaggedito the..DecreeVVl’i;lo’lCier by ‘V D<\/p>\n
Puttaramaiah for a loan   ori”’09:lO.1991.
\nThereafter Puttararnaiah   land as he
\nwas in need of i”tinds_:’to   loan of Decree
\nHolder herein     necessity. At that
\ntil\ufb01\ufb01a  Decree Holder, who
\nagreed to  valuable consideration of
\n lu:Ai”ter adjtistirig the mortgage loan of
\n sale consideration, the Decree<\/p>\n
  sale consideration of Rs.E-30,000\/- to<\/p>\n
 the <\/p>\n
  Oyf\ufb01reeeipt of balance sale consideration of Rs.30,000\/~<\/p>\n
 Puttaramaiah executed the Sale Deed of aforesaid<\/p>\n
W.\n<\/p>\n
land in the presence of attesting witness and presented the<\/p>\n
Sale Deed for registration in the office of j11risdiction,:3dV_:Si1t)w<\/p>\n
Registrar. However, before said Sale Deed could  i.<\/p>\n
Puttararnaiah went out of the Sub–RegistrarMoftiee\u00bb o’n,4_’the_ ”<\/p>\n
pretext that one of his child is uriwelir  <\/p>\n
came back and the document “~~con\\}eya1’ir;e “Was ” V<\/p>\n
executed and presented for:”regist.i’atio_i1  ke\ufb01p’t~per1Eding for<\/p>\n
registration.\n<\/p>\n
4. Thereaftelj.  2 ‘bit:hdthewpetitioner seeking
\ncompletion  the Sub~–RegistJ:ar
\nrefused to  against which an appeal
\nwas filed by _LiecVre.e’a herein in R.A.No.19\/1996-97
\nhefore   Bangalore, under Section 13 of<\/p>\n
the  During the pendency of the said appeal,<\/p>\n
‘ ” ,..,,._,.;;1qe  iVSaIe Deed, Puttaramaiah died and his wife<\/p>\n
:.ar1d..,chiidrerii’r:aIrie on record. The said appeal filed before the<\/p>\n
 ‘Registrar, was dismissed on 20.05.2002 holding that<\/p>\n
 ‘under the Indian Registration Act, two witnesses are required<\/p>\n
‘*1<\/p>\n
to prove the execution of the Sale Deed. Since the plaintiff’<\/p>\n
exainined only one witness, appeal came to be disniitssed. on<\/p>\n
that ground. Thereafter the Decree Holder hereiraiiied  ~<\/p>\n
in O.S.No.1{)3\/2002 on the {He of Addirtionat’V’C’i\u20ac%iiV”‘Jddge._V A’<\/p>\n
(Sr.Dn.). Ramanagara, for the relief  <\/p>\n
defendant Puttaramaiah, owner  schedu1e”:..;v’p’roperty ” V<\/p>\n
executed a sale deed  8,.r7′.’ 2nd
\ndefendant Sub-Registrar  -‘deed on even
\ndate, for permanent’ 1(a) to
\n1(d) from  and enjoyment of
\nthe suit   ‘  d I<\/p>\n
5. The     decreed by Judgment and<\/p>\n
Decree  iO’.’20,Q_5.vpursuant to which the petitioner<\/p>\n
heiein\ufb01ied  Petition in Ex.No.46\/2006 on the tile of<\/p>\n
  Judge (Sr.Dn..), Ramanagara, seeking<\/p>\n
.:h_i’e’.:\u00ab,d_j4rection  the second respondent to complete the<\/p>\n
{~.’.vVV’1’egid.\u00a7trati”on formality of the Sale Deed dated 08.07.1993<\/p>\n
. ‘V:a’Vie\u00a7te’eut\u00a7,ed by Puttaramaiah in her favour.<\/p>\n
‘Wk<\/p>\n
6. in the said execution proceedings, the respondents<\/p>\n
entered appearance and raised an objection that.”~.1inder<\/p>\n
Section 77 of the Registration Act, the Decree  ~<\/p>\n
present the document before the jurisdicti.ona1′ Va<\/p>\n
for cornpieting registration fonnality  3:0 <\/p>\n
date of decree in the original suit,  \\i5V.f3r”:f1_Ch._t:1’i(:3 Siaieii\ufb01eed ” V<\/p>\n
cannot be registered and Decree  eicecution
\nproceedings. Since the petitioner to present the
\nSale Deed for  time, the
\nexecution petition and the same should<\/p>\n
be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
7. In the  petitioner herein who is the
\nDecree H_;o1der contended that the failure to present the<\/p>\n
  days of the Decree for completion of<\/p>\n
  registration is procedurai in nature and on that<\/p>\n
Vmground it’se1f,.pV.tI’1e Court cannot refuse to enforce the decree<\/p>\n
c  is–secured by her. In support of the said submission<\/p>\n
  upon the Judgment of this Court reported in<\/p>\n
‘M<\/p>\n
2003(1) KAR.L.J. 441 in the matter of Anjinamma ‘and
\nanother Vs. Puttahariyappa and Others, whereiv’nV_j:’<\/p>\n
Court has held as under:\n<\/p>\n
“REGISTRATION ACT, ;1<3"08\u00ab,. tsemanir  <\/p>\n
77(1) – Registration of document I}'ecrei5MO:f   <\/p>\n
Court for – Delay in preseiifgng do_cument ' _
\nregistration within 30 days\u00bb, decree 'due, to  '
\ndelay attributable to both _C_og'ur_t' party –_3
\nParty, held, cannot..4bje depr';T.ved._V_of'bene\ufb01t of
\ndecree M Registering .Authority._ to
\nregister docu_1n.ent.'fr"" – if ' "  'V\n<\/p>\n
8. The exec11\u00a7tix11g'<_"';a_'3Vhot,i1't  through the same,
\nopined thatgsuchiri condonirig the delay can be
\ntaken only by  not by Executing Court,<\/p>\n
with this._\u00a7'gobservationV,V Exvecution Cg-1,11-t has dismissed the<\/p>\n
  the same the petitioner has filed this<\/p>\n
 *  revision ' petition; ._ ' "V<\/p>\n
 In thisfpetition, though the respondents were duly<\/p>\n
 setiied, _they remained unrepresented.<\/p>\n
W2.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
10. Heard the counsel for petitioner. Perused the impugned<\/p>\n
order dated 12.12.2008 passed by the Executing <\/p>\n
Execution Case No.46\/ 2006 and also the  ~<\/p>\n
Decree dated 26.10.2005 passed in O.S.No.1f-.53’\/”2t)O2′;”‘ ffi\u00a7_he0_ ”<\/p>\n
operative portion of the Judgment is as”untler:
\n‘The suit of the })1ajntiii?i.is’–rdec1;ee–d\u00a7   it <\/p>\n
The plaintiff is declared  the purchaser
\nof the suit schedule property. ?\u00bbi.5i?11e5d;efer1dai’1ts are
\ndirected to execute ‘-t.he’f ‘V sale,  d;ee(_i dated
\n08.07.1993. E’aiii11g;’txfi1izii:-. “t.tjie_ dfeferldant No.2
\nshaft proceed toi;1jegist_ergt1*ie decumerit\ufb01<\/p>\n
The  ciefendantsif  “restrained from
\niiiterfeiirig  pla;i;ifI\u00bbtii*i7_s possession and enjoyment<\/p>\n
of suit schetiu-!:e_property? _ ~<\/p>\n
 to ‘the cLjcu’r’ristar1ces arising in the
\ncase, I directvthe-pa:fties~”to bear their own costs.<\/p>\n
 Draw up ‘pre.1.i.n1inary decree accordingly.”<\/p>\n
ii.  ‘the operative portion of the Judgment in<\/p>\n
  clearly discloses that the Trial Court after<\/p>\n
.:\u00a2:lcorrs:ide1″.i;iglVthe entire pleadings of the parties, evidence on<\/p>\n
l”.”:..,_re(\u00a7er\u20ac1\u00a7,’has decreed the suit declaring that the petitioner<\/p>\n
 (plaintiff in the said suit) is the purchaser of suit<\/p>\n
‘~”*\\<\/p>\n
schedule property with a direction to defendant, Nos.i(a} to<\/p>\n
Md}, i.e., widow and children of late Puttaramaiah to evzetztilte<\/p>\n
the Saie Deed dated 08.07.1993 and to register  a.<\/p>\n
favour of plaintiff, i.e., petitioner l1erei;r.:,\u00bbtt\u00bbo\u00bbnly   ‘Al’<\/p>\n
to do so, there is direction to defendariyt   <\/p>\n
register the said document. Thereiore, there’arVe.:ti?zfo””reliefs ” V<\/p>\n
granted in favour of plaintif\ufb01   one is to} get the
\nSaie Deed executed by legalaheirsll in respect
\nof the suit schedrileiepfroperty l is direction to
\ndefendant  Channapatna, to<\/p>\n
register the    l <\/p>\n
12. AdInittedly\u00ab._.the  and Decree dated 26.10.2005<\/p>\n
passed   on the file of Additional Civil<\/p>\n
JuVdge.~~V(ASr.Dn:.’j,liiamanagara, is not challenged by the said.<\/p>\n
i l5….lega.l  of thereby the said Judgment<\/p>\n
\u00bb_.’_jarid._Decree_has become final and the declaration passed in<\/p>\n
suit that plaintiff is the purchaser of suit schedule<\/p>\n
lidproperty has become final, so also the direction issued to the<\/p>\n
W<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
have to be presented within 30 days from
\nthe date of decree, hence same is barred by<\/p>\n
time and issued an endorsement to the effect
\non 18.3.2002 itself, the copy of the same  ‘
\nherewith produced and marked as Annexu.re–  f; .,
\nC accompany this writ petition, no V  L”
\nopportunity offered to the petitioners before. ”<\/p>\n
issuing ofimpugned endorsementf’   ~. -. ‘<\/p>\n
6. Further, in vieWtlof~i.1aw Aiaid  <\/p>\n
the Patna High Court in the\u00b0aforesaid’.case: arid
\nby careful reading of,—Section—-‘Z’7–of-the Act,.,,tt,,.is
\nclear that, prescripticui; of-:30.  tinrie in the
\nabove provision for presenting the”dor;ument for
\nits registration rafter ob.i.air1in.g the”‘vdee’ifee before
\nthe Civil cou_ri\u00abis”-a piroeedi11’ai”~a’s.peCt:which has
\nto be vieweg1i._1en;ie’ri’t1y”to see that ‘j’..iS’ti’C\u20ac shall not
\nsuffer. The Apex” ‘Case’ of Shreenath
\nand Another V iiiaje-sh–.  Others, at paragraph
\n3 after interpiretiri-g*Or\u00a3iA\u20acr 21,””Ri1Ies 97(1) and (2),
\n101, :39,_lO0’ar1.d”’10’3,Vas_ they stood p1’101′ to the
\n1976 Ameridmerit.a11(t-also Rules 35 and 36 of
\nthe ru1es\u00bb,h,as siiccirictiyglaid down the law which
\nreads thus.\u00bb ” ‘  ”\n<\/p>\n
“In interpi’etin_o* arty procedural law, where
\nmore tha’n_o’n.e interpretation is possible, the
\n whteh-cit’: tails” ti:g’j.. procedure without
\n justice Tf—to5= be adopted. The<\/p>\n
‘procediiral law is’ always subservient to and
\nofjustice: Any interpretation which
\n elac’i’es’~-or frxistrates the recipient of justice is<\/p>\n
rum<\/p>\n
Executing Court has failed to look into the matter in right<\/p>\n
perspective and has misdirected itself to hold <\/p>\n
Execution Petition is not maintairiabie. in the  ~<\/p>\n
order dated 12.12.2008 passed by t.he.Add.itio1’ia10V’Ci\u00a3f;1V’Jtidge-._ ‘Au<\/p>\n
(Sr.Dn.), Ramanagara, in Execution  <\/p>\n
set aside and the matter is f\u20aciI1~?i1}dBd  Estecutmg ” 0′<\/p>\n
Court, with a direction to pass  (}irecti11g the
\nSub-Registrar, Channapatna’  Deed dated
\n08.07.1993 execute'(3EVLLi:;y  in favour of
\npetitioner hereiirii    from the date of
\npresentation of   S1ib\u00a5Registrar, after<\/p>\n
completion of registratio\ufb01’-fonna1:\ufb01ty?’rv .. .,  ~ \u00ab it ~’<\/p>\n
With4.–th_ese o1:iserV’at.i.oIis”,~\u00abthe revision petition is ailowed,<\/p>\n
without  — order as -to’  _<\/p>\n
ss,\/F
\nIusss<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Smt C S Gangamma vs Sri Puttaramaiah S\/O. Late … on 30 November, 2009 Author: S.N.Satyanarayana IN THE men COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER BEFORE j’ % V THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ” CIVIL REVISION PETITION 1Vf0~4\/5I{ ‘OE[20 (}9 BETWEEN: SMT.C.S.GANGAMMA, Aged about 67 Years, […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-15471","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSmt C S Gangamma vs Sri Puttaramaiah S\/O. Late ... on 30 November, 2009 - 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\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Smt C S Gangamma vs Sri Puttaramaiah S\/O. Late ... on 30 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-11-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-09-06T00:22:16+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Smt C S Gangamma vs Sri Puttaramaiah S\\\/O. Late … on 30 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-06T00:22:16+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1494,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009\",\"name\":\"Smt C S Gangamma vs Sri Puttaramaiah S\\\/O. Late ... on 30 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-06T00:22:16+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Smt C S Gangamma vs Sri Puttaramaiah S\\\/O. Late … on 30 November, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Smt C S Gangamma vs Sri Puttaramaiah S\/O. Late ... on 30 November, 2009 - 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\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Smt C S Gangamma vs Sri Puttaramaiah S\/O. Late ... on 30 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-09-06T00:22:16+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Smt C S Gangamma vs Sri Puttaramaiah S\/O. Late … on 30 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-06T00:22:16+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009"},"wordCount":1494,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009","name":"Smt C S Gangamma vs Sri Puttaramaiah S\/O. Late ... on 30 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-06T00:22:16+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-c-s-gangamma-vs-sri-puttaramaiah-so-late-on-30-november-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Smt C S Gangamma vs Sri Puttaramaiah S\/O. Late … on 30 November, 2009"}]},{"@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\/15471","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=15471"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15471\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15471"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15471"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15471"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}