{"id":15698,"date":"2010-09-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010"},"modified":"2014-06-25T22:50:09","modified_gmt":"2014-06-25T17:20:09","slug":"smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"Smt Lakshmamma vs Mudda on 15 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Smt Lakshmamma vs Mudda on 15 September, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA AT EANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE 15*\" DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 201o__\n\nBEFORE\n\nTHE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. vENuGoPAI.A:----Go'fwo\u00a7.  '\n\nWRIT PETITION No.22586,\/~2.of;Q (t3.f~?1}V'C'E--(f3}'.\"'   \n\nBETWEEN:\n\nSmt. Lakshmamma,\n\nW\/o. Rajappa,\n\nAged about 53 years, __\n\nResiding at MaruthEnag'ar.g_\n\nKamakshipalya,  ~  r\n\nBangalore -- 560 079. '- _   __ \n V j  1    PETITIONER\n\n(By Sri C.Pral\u00a7~aS?I..ggyIAdv:;._) :    \n\n1. MucId.a.\u00ab. V _   \nAged a--b4_out_ 53 _years. \n\n 2. ,|\\i\u00a7arayana,  'T\n\nV-Agar:-T..a bout 48' years.\n\n 3; f fgsh.afr~..k;a \n' ._ \".4\\gea' \u00aba_E:ou{;'38 years.\n\n _ 4.  iV\u00a7ara'i.ahv,';\n\n--\" m' V, \n\nAgedabout 41 years.\n\n  Ciiikkaiah,\n. Aged about 31 years.\n\n\n\nI0\n\nRespondents 1 to 5 are the<\/pre>\n
Sons of late Chikkanna @ Chikkaiah,
\nAll are residing at Kithanahaiir,
\nDasanapura Hobii,<\/p>\n
Neiamangaia Taiuk,
\nBangalore District.\n<\/p>\n
6. Chikkathayamma,
\nW\/o. Kernpanna, ..\n<\/p>\n
Since dead by her L.R<\/p>\n
6(a) Munirathnarnma,
\nD\/o. Kempaiah,
\nAged about Bityears.   .4 .\n<\/p>\n
7. Dayananda,
\nS\/o. Kempaiah, 1
\nAged abog.-t”Z133\/ears. =:\n<\/p>\n
8. Hanum\u20acanti.ia_.V
\nS\/o. Kerdpa~!ahn, 3 V
\nAgedi’abo;iit 22″Ty’ears.\u00e9V”‘\n<\/p>\n
9. Puttamma, ‘ _ ‘  .\n<\/p>\n
D\/o. K’empaia’i:_,  ” , ..\n<\/p>\n
Aged about 21. .3\/ea’rs.”‘<\/p>\n
 are residinVg”a’t”i\\Vio.72\/2,<\/p>\n
 ‘n,I1I Cros.s,”Thimmenahaiii,<\/p>\n
‘*_8adgakx\u00e9;356oo79.\n<\/p>\n
, ., to, , u.RESPONDENTS
\n(By Sr: T.C.-Sathish Kumar, Adv. for R1 to R5;
\nser’vice=..’of “notice to R6 dispensed with)<\/p>\n
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227<\/p>\n
 ‘CfoAfVt’h~e Constitution of India praying to quash the order
\n dated’ 18.6.2010 on I.A.No.10 in O.S.No.32\/2009, on the
\n fiie of the Civii Judge (Sr.Dn.) at Neiarnangaia, vide<\/p>\n
Annexure — D and consequently allow I.A.No.1O in the
\nabove said suit. T <\/p>\n
This petition coming on for preliminary  y’:Bf\u00ab<\/p>\n
group, this day the Court made the following:__’–*.. _  <\/p>\n
Petitioner\/plaintiff has iinstittiteid :V’a.gainis.t<\/p>\n
respondents\/defendants forth “partition of i’suiiti._:”sc.hedule’V.i’<\/p>\n
property by metes and i3ounds?’an_d=to put pyiaintiffs in<\/p>\n
possession of their   ‘mesne profits.
\nRespondent\/defendants”haye   statement and
\nhave conte_ste:d’   iweieiiframed and trial has
\ntaken   under Order 6 Rule
\n17   or the court to amend the
\nplaint, toiiminicvh  filed objections. The trial<\/p>\n
court’ upon co’n.s_iderat’ion, has rejected LA No.10 on the<\/p>\n
 amendment of plaint is unnecessary for<\/p>\n
 of the case. Said order has been<\/p>\n
qu\u00e9stioriedin this writ petition.<\/p>\n
V ”  2.” Sri C.Prai<ash, iearned advocate appearing for<\/p>\n
–‘ petitioner contends that, the trial court has not<\/p>\n
i  “considered {A No.10 in the correct perspective and if the<\/p>\n
E:\n<\/p>\n
impugned order is allowed to remain, the same would<\/p>\n
cause compiications while executing the decree, “case<\/p>\n
the plaintiff succeeds in the suit. Learned counsel.’.,su_bi_%ii_t’s.,<\/p>\n
that, there being no change of cause o_f…Ei_A4\u00a2tiQ’r::A.\/zcr <\/p>\n
nature of suit and the amendment <\/p>\n
regard to schedute of the suit propelrt-ies \u00a2on%.,=_-authors,<\/p>\n
described, ought to haveV”i’a\u00bb..:been as the
\nmistake\/omission  account of the
\nfactors stated in the  of LA No.10.\n<\/p>\n
Learned coun’s’et,:,subn1its, order is
\nirrational     u V’ V l<\/p>\n
 it i.Sri   teamed counsel<\/p>\n
appearing for the_’r–esp_on’dents, on the other hand submits<\/p>\n
 suit v\\ra’s”i”n*st’ituted in the year 1997, trial of the<\/p>\n
suit”ifs”-com’piet’e, certain admissions have been elicited<\/p>\n
 the7.,_cross~examinatiori of the witnesses of the<\/p>\n
“.__plaEntiffs”:with regard to non–mentioning of the boundaries<\/p>\n
 schedule properties and the appiication, if were to<\/p>\n
 be atlowed, would cause serious prejudice to the<\/p>\n
be.\n<\/p>\n
defendants. Learned counsel submits that, trial court has<\/p>\n
correctly considered LA No.10 and the impugned’Ior.der”‘rin<\/p>\n
the facts and circumstances of the case is just*..’::”  <\/p>\n
4. Having heard the learnedi<\/p>\n
sides, I have perused the record ol’b’the*.writ petlition’. if K<\/p>\n
5. By the proposed   the
\nboundaries of the p’rop.e’rt.ies  only been
\nproposed to be iyncorporatvedy. 1Sri::Pra~lt.aAs:h,,..learned counsel
\nappearing  11.08.2010 that,
\nthe     any further evidence
\nwith    Keeping the said
\nsubmission’-in’  the writ petition was ordered<\/p>\n
to the resp4o”ndents. ‘”Having considered the matter, I am<\/p>\n
 ,.,.,sat’isfied’p’.that, the p\u00e9titiyon deserves to be allowed, since the<\/p>\n
 .._,tria’.litceu’rt;%w’hi:e:’_jrejecting the prayer in LA No.10 has failed<\/p>\n
toie;~terc,i.::e’_ jurisdiction vested in it by law and faiiure to<\/p>\n
“-.so exercise it, has occasioned possible failure of justice.<\/p>\n
V.’-V’jI’ri_al:’A”Court has failed to notice that, the plaintiffs have not<\/p>\n
ciianged the cause of action or the nagre of the suit.<\/p>\n
\/K<\/p>\n
Further they have now undertaken not to seek re–opening
\nof the case and lead further evidence with regard ;to_ the<\/p>\n
amended scheduie of the plaint.\n<\/p>\n
6. In the circumstances, the erro~r’r”‘cor:nmi’t.tedV  “= V<\/p>\n
the trial court is liable to be corrected, ,,f1’Th\u00abere.’a-ppears<\/p>\n
be negligence on the part of-.._p|aintif,_fs) in  <\/p>\n
boundaries of the suit schedule.,:properti’es:in the plaint.
\nThe location of the suitfterns p~-r_opert_ies, their survey
\nnumber and extent  been “.imerit.io’ned, but the<\/p>\n
boundaries of’: each item _of\u00bb.o’roV’p’er’ties has not been<\/p>\n
stated{bV”‘lihei’ .co\u00ab:,r_’ld _haVvVe sought an amendment
\neariierxAaiso\u00ab.g ‘Bu’t,fjVtlhe..:’drel’ayed application having not<\/p>\n
brought anychangfe ei-thi\u00e9lr in the cause of action or in the<\/p>\n
 ‘-v.,n\u00a7tur:e of suit and\u00e9inview of the undertaking on the part of<\/p>\n
  \u00e9togseek reopening of the case to lead further<\/p>\n
 matter, no prejudice as such would be<\/p>\n
“-.caused  the defendants\/respondents. In my opinion, the<\/p>\n
V”:V’propo.3ed amendment is necessary for the purpose of<\/p>\n
K’—..’mvb’r\u00a7inging to the fore the real question in controversy<\/p>\n
E;\n<\/p>\n
between the parties and the refusal to permit the
\namendment would create needless complications at the<\/p>\n
stage of finai decree proceedings in the eventviof-.._:lt~he<\/p>\n
plaintiff\/petitioner succeeding in the suit. <\/p>\n
order in the said view of the matter,,i,s_ irratioha-leaFi\ufb01-iiVlega.iV” ”<\/p>\n
and hence, is unsustainable.\n<\/p>\n
In the result, the pet-i_tdio.n stands’ _alli~owed;’VwV “The ” it<\/p>\n
impugned order StandS.C[UaSVAhe{i:.”‘–.LA No.’IO..fii,e’d in the
\nCOLil’t below stands ailo\\uivetd,~  \ufb01to.?_t.h:e’\u00bb\u00bbplaintiffs paying
\ncost of Rs.5,00,Q\/”–.__to th’e”‘defend.a}ntsV’-in,.the trial court on
\nthe next’     <\/p>\n
Ting’weeks_ti’nfie:’i’s~eliowed for payment\/depositing of<\/p>\n
the cost and f_orvca;–rry?i.ng””out of the amendment, in terms<\/p>\n
 “prayer i’n_I.A’i\\lo’;”1’O. Payment of cost is a condition<\/p>\n
 ,__’p’receden.t:foVriwcairrying out the amendment.<\/p>\n
A  No  as to costs in this writ petition.<\/p>\n
561\/*3?\n<\/p>\n
Tudg\u00e9<\/p>\n
   la\u00bb<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Smt Lakshmamma vs Mudda on 15 September, 2010 Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA AT EANGALORE DATED THIS THE 15*” DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 201o__ BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. vENuGoPAI.A:—-Go’fwo\u00a7. ‘ WRIT PETITION No.22586,\/~2.of;Q (t3.f~?1}V’C’E–(f3}’.”‘ BETWEEN: Smt. Lakshmamma, W\/o. Rajappa, Aged about 53 years, __ Residing at MaruthEnag’ar.g_ […]<\/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-15698","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSmt Lakshmamma vs Mudda on 15 September, 2010 - 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-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Smt Lakshmamma vs Mudda on 15 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-09-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-06-25T17:20:09+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=\"5 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-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Smt Lakshmamma vs Mudda on 15 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-25T17:20:09+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1027,\"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-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010\",\"name\":\"Smt Lakshmamma vs Mudda on 15 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-25T17:20:09+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Smt Lakshmamma vs Mudda on 15 September, 2010\"}]},{\"@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 Lakshmamma vs Mudda on 15 September, 2010 - 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-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Smt Lakshmamma vs Mudda on 15 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-06-25T17:20:09+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Smt Lakshmamma vs Mudda on 15 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-25T17:20:09+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010"},"wordCount":1027,"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-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010","name":"Smt Lakshmamma vs Mudda on 15 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-25T17:20:09+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-lakshmamma-vs-mudda-on-15-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Smt Lakshmamma vs Mudda on 15 September, 2010"}]},{"@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\/15698","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=15698"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15698\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15698"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15698"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15698"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}