{"id":159335,"date":"2010-02-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010"},"modified":"2014-12-16T13:19:35","modified_gmt":"2014-12-16T07:49:35","slug":"mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"Mariyamma vs The Deputy Commissioner Koppal … on 24 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Mariyamma vs The Deputy Commissioner Koppal … on 24 February, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: A.S.Bopanna<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAI{_A_ V: ':A.\n\nCIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD_.:__ if  1\nDATED THIS THE 24th DAY ();1f\u00abfA\u00bbVi?\u00bb\"EBR'1EJ;\u00a3i.1':'i\u00a7;_V\ufb01'(\".'V:.1v(}AV  \"\n\nBEFoRE=..__ V 4' \"  ' \nTHE I-ION'BLE MR. JUSTICE\"    3<\/pre>\n
R.S.A N0. i6E.’g,’_2Co\u20aci’-\u00ab
\nBETWEEN:   K ‘  V’<\/p>\n
Smt. Mariyamma<\/p>\n
W\/0. late Vasarjths; Rargi _ _
\nAged about 36     _
\nCaste: Maczligaj .QCC.:.’;’.CC01_l.r: ”  ‘  \u00bb
\nR\/0. Ambedkag” Nag2{1* \u00bb < "\n<\/p>\n
Gangavaihi,'”GVang–ayHtl3._i’Taiuk\u00ab –.  V  V
\nKoppai Dist’riCj\ufb01 _   ‘ _<\/p>\n
… APPELLANT<\/p>\n
[By Sri. VaHrapfaE’\u00e9iC1,
\nAND?  V   <\/p>\n
 ”  _ 1.  Deputy CCmH1iss\u00a3oner<\/p>\n
gaxi <\/p>\n
‘ . _.KCp;:’>ai. Disp, Koppai<\/p>\n
 ”  {Director of
\nA .PubliC.111l5jt;’uCti0ns
\nKoppel D’Est., Koppai<\/p>\n
\u00ab. h   3, ;ThC’B1s0Ci< Education Officer<\/p>\n
V Education Department
\n' 'Gangavathi Taluk<\/p>\n
 Gangavathi, Koppal Dist.\n<\/p>\n
;E<\/p>\n
A<\/p>\n
4. The Head Master
\nJ anata Seva. English Medium School
\nJuly Nagar, Gangavathi.\n<\/p>\n
(By Sri. P. H. Gotkhindi, GA for R}. to R4)<\/p>\n
 RE_S\u00a7.:50NE5.IS:N’F3 .\n<\/p>\n
RSA IS FILED U\/S. 100 OF ‘IAGA.:INSffId”GeATI\u00a7%.~::
\nJUDGMENT AND DEGREE _D’_I*D. 9.9.04 ?AS-SED ‘IN’;R;A
\nNo.12 \/03 ON THE FILE or ‘rHi\u00ab:_ CIVIL.’ JUD’GE”~._{Sva.. DN.), = ‘<\/p>\n
GANGAVATHI, ALLOWING THE__”AI\u00e9PEAL. ‘AND “SETTING
\nASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND-“‘*DECR’F\u00a7E DTD….2.S’.08.2003
\nPASSED {N OS I\\Io.12\u00ab–,r_0jS C7-N f1’1?~lE.__’1?_lLE or THE ADDL.
\nCIVIL JUDGE (JR. DN.), GrI1\\2’G.\u00bbw’A.IrIa1I;r’-.   –.<\/p>\n
THIS APPISAL.CGMING..:oNV”r.eR 1’+’I\u00a7’.~”I’\u00abAL HEARING THIS
\nDAY, THE CQUR’I\u00a7~D_ELI’?JERED f15HE”FeLLowING:<\/p>\n
_’_l’he i4i”a,1Gpella.ntA’*v_ herein is the plaintiff in 0.55<\/p>\n
 The”‘”Su’it in question was instituted for the<\/p>\n
 reliief_ofddelerlaration and mandatory injunction. The trial<\/p>\n
Codrt afteriisieohsidering the rival contentions decreed the Suit<\/p>\n
 by itsiiijudgment and decree dated 28.08.2003. The<\/p>\n
A  defendants were before the lower Appellate Court in RA<\/p>\n
No.12\/2003. The lower Appellate Court by its judgment<\/p>\n
 dated 09.09.2004 has set aside the judgment and decree of<\/p>\n
the trial Court and consequently dismissed the Suit. The<\/p>\n
i<\/p>\n
“I<\/p>\n
plaintiff therefore claiming to be aggrieved by the <\/p>\n
View expressed by the Courts below is before   i’<\/p>\n
this second appeal.   ~<\/p>\n
2. The case of the plpaintiff ispthat, vbelloriglitolllp<\/p>\n
Hindu Madiga caste. in this  it islcanltendelldi that her
\nson Gunturi  lCl)l7l.Oi’l.1990 at
\nGangavati also belongs   the said son
\nstudied at JarialtaLSeval__Eriglilsh’\u00abhlediiirnilpf’School, Julynagar,
\nGaf1g3Vathi.   standard. The case of
\nthe plaintiff  son to the school, the
\nhusband ofthe  \ufb01lled up the application form<\/p>\n
by others and inthe said application form caste was wrongly<\/p>\n
  rnenltioyiedevpas Hindt1….C’haluvadi instead of Hindu Madiga. It<\/p>\n
‘ i.\u00absi’in.pth_.Vatl context, the plaintiff being armed with the caste<\/p>\n
cert’ificate’.l–l’issAi;:ed by the competent authority in respect of<\/p>\n
her’ son flunturi Ravikumar and also her husband<\/p>\n
2  approached the school authorities seeking for rectification of<\/p>\n
school records to indicate the caste as Hindu Madiga<\/p>\n
if “instead of Hindu Chaluvadi. The request of the plaintiff was<\/p>\n
not accepted and as such the plaintiff instituted the suit.<\/p>\n
it<\/p>\n
at<\/p>\n
5. The trial Court ultimately accepted the .<\/p>\n
plaintiff and decreed the suit. In the appeal’ <\/p>\n
defendants, the lower Appellate   the<\/p>\n
judgment and decree of the trial Coul1’tV_has ir:.’Vfa\ufb02ct:4relieiI:l on <\/p>\n
the documents produced by   and
\nD2 and has observed  tt\ufb01leoifiithe saididocuments,
\nthe trial CourtAV’cou1d’__n:o_t._   the evidence
\ntendered by   of its conclusion.<\/p>\n
Hence the of the View that the
\nrelief    have been granted by
\nthe trialuCourt.*  lower Appellate Court has<\/p>\n
noticed thatin” fact: the husband of the plaintiff himself has<\/p>\n
 the clas’t’e'”‘a’s Hindu Chaiuvadi instead of Hindu<\/p>\n
  MaCdiga’–a_i91tdi’at:Vt1j.is stage they cannot resile from the same.<\/p>\n
  Court while admitting the appeal on<\/p>\n
 22.O9L’2VQ\u00a5D5 has framed the following substantiai question of<\/p>\n
“-“_ia,w for consideration, which reads as hereunder:<\/p>\n
“Whether the \ufb01nding of the first Appeilate Court
\nreversing the judgment and decree passed by the trial<\/p>\n
Court in dismissing the suit of the plaintiff is perverse<\/p>\n
<\u00a3<\/p>\n
rs<\/p>\n
and arbitrary for n.on.~consideration of the material on
\nrecord in.cludz'n.g the evidence of PW} _an_d-.._C*:.he<\/p>\n
documents produced by her?\n<\/p>\n
7′. In the light of the substantial lavv <\/p>\n
framed by this Court, the mannehof ieonisideration”by,___tl=;isAi<\/p>\n
Court would have to be in .the__ nature” of c-:)n’s;idevringz;_i\u00a7 the<\/p>\n
evidence tendered by the parties”‘blefo_re  below and
\nre–appreciated by the  andliinui that light
\nto find out as to whether Court has
\ncommitted  the evidence and
\n   ;  _<\/p>\n
Siiilnlthis  Jiacts as narrated above would<\/p>\n
indicate that ‘-thedicase of the plaintiff was that her son<\/p>\n
 ” Raivtikumariiiin fact beiong to the Hindu Madiga caste<\/p>\n
but  wrongly indicated as Hindu Chaluvadi<\/p>\n
while avdrn.ivttiing her son to the school and as such mistake<\/p>\n
 had bieven’ committed by her husband. No doubt as rightly<\/p>\n
 out by the learned Govt. Advocate, if a suit is filed<\/p>\n
  H for declaration of the caste, the same would be beyond the<\/p>\n
competence of Civil Court since the appropriate authorities<\/p>\n
i<\/p>\n
r:\n<\/p>\n
would have to issue the caste certi\ufb01cate and veri\ufb01cation of<\/p>\n
the same wouid have to be made by the caste <\/p>\n
Committee after coming into the existence of  -fpin\u00e9viewt  ‘<\/p>\n
of the said contention urged by the learned <\/p>\n
requires to be noticed in the instanticase. is   iplaintiff’r.<\/p>\n
was not before the Civil Couirtiiseekingithe”  to
\nrender a finding of fact ‘fc)’:.1_&_its  regard tothie caste of
\nthe plaintiff or her son.   had relied on the
\ndocuments    certificate of
\nGunturi  in respect of whom the<\/p>\n
rectification.  sc_h’o.Ql . records was sought. The
\ndocument th’e._c”aste certi\ufb01cate in respect of the<\/p>\n
husband of the_pia’intiiiff. “it is based on the said documents,<\/p>\n
that?1Eii’l%1iiiT*i\u00a7OLlghimHi’O1′ accepting the said document and<\/p>\n
 de.elarinig..that~.the correct caste of the son of the plaintiff is<\/p>\n
Hittetu and not Hindu Chaluvadi. At this stage itself,<\/p>\n
 the covntention of the learned Govt. Advocate that only<\/p>\n
 eattejsited copy of the caste certificate belonging to the son has<\/p>\n
  M been marked at EXP2 is to be noticed. In this regard, the<\/p>\n
t<\/p>\n
Hr<\/p>\n
said contention cannot be accepted for more one<\/p>\n
reason.\n<\/p>\n
Firstly, what is to be noticed is that the’pia-intifi”got_tne <\/p>\n
said document marked in the eV\u00bbidenc–e,\u00a7? ‘At -.th”i itiirne<\/p>\n
marking of the document, no’ objection has been raise_4;1 on <\/p>\n
behalf of the defendants for  the decument.
\nOn this aspect, the   _,Hon’b1e-A Supreme
\nCourt is ciear that if  oi”vv,the’;_document is not
\nobjected to, it   to question the<\/p>\n
said docunient:isubsequenctify. gt  <\/p>\n
Secoriidiy,  the plaintiff was cross-<\/p>\n
examined the ._(3r’io\\,1t’.’.:i?”1eader. There is absolutely no<\/p>\n
 suggestion to V “thev______p,l.aintiff stating that the document<\/p>\n
\u00bbprod_uced\u00ab.is\u00ab,n’ot__ genuine. One more aspect of the matter is<\/p>\n
 the said contention is taken in respect of<\/p>\n
theiiidoctirnerit at EXP2, the document at EX.P3 belonging to<\/p>\n
,::thc._husband of the piaintiff namely, the father of Gunturi<\/p>\n
Ravikjumar, the son in question, is a certi\ufb01ed copy which has<\/p>\n
i ” “-been issued by the authorities and in the said document, the<\/p>\n
caste is mentioned as Hindu Madiga. Therefore, these<\/p>\n
i<\/p>\n
4-!<\/p>\n
documents in any case indicate that the certi\ufb01cates’<\/p>\n
by the competent authority indicates the  it<\/p>\n
plaintiffs son as Hindu Madiga. If by<\/p>\n
the competent authority indicates-the_’_’ipartienglarly <\/p>\n
such event, the suit was limi.te’ci._insoI”ar the the ” i<\/p>\n
said documents and declaring.__:tilf’1vat’the castel_AAas.i\u00a7per said
\ndocument is a particular’Calstgi,\u00e9tnld’~itht3’Ieafter for issuing
\nmandatory injunction  to carryout
\nthe corrections’.   lower Appellate
\nCourt  has come to the
\nconclusion  was not justified in relying on
\nthe evidencetif since the materials placed by<\/p>\n
defendants 1\\lo;-in to’l4  indicate that the evidence of the<\/p>\n
ii”plaintiff-l’ialoVne_ couldmnot have been relied. To examine the<\/p>\n
e-..sai_Cl\\ lower Appellate Court, a perusal of the<\/p>\n
rna-terial.s~re’lied on by the defendants would indicate that<\/p>\n
i*.EX.D1..i$_ii:IhE application which was filed by the husband of<\/p>\n
“”i_tl’ie_ plaintiff and the Ex.D2 is the extract of the Register of<\/p>\n
  admission. In fact, the very case of the plaintiff is that the<\/p>\n
error appearing in the documents at Exs.Dl and D2 namely,<\/p>\n
i<\/p>\n
‘9’<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
the application and the register requires to be correcite-tihanvd<\/p>\n
therefore, the piaintiff was before the trial Court?”<\/p>\n
Therefore in that CircumstancieisiiiExsiill and”D_2 in-‘any:<\/p>\n
event cannot defeat the case of the;_piaintiffisi.nc~e. <\/p>\n
relief sought for is correction-.Q}”w..wrong ientries  itheisaid V<\/p>\n
documents. in fact, theg:ilaintiff*i1ersei\u00a3_to esta”o.lis.ii\u00a7 this fact
\nhas obtained the extracohof iithgg:-.4;idQf:\ufb01i\u00a7ssio1i.Vdocument and
\nproduced it as     is an error as
\nagainst the.  EXs.P2 and P3.\n<\/p>\n
Thereforefif i1i\u00a7ep’t view, the fact that the
\npiaintiifs    Maciiga caste even as per the<\/p>\n
certificatesiissued b_yAt~hie’\u00abcompetent authority cannot remain<\/p>\n
 in Ther”efore.,vthe tower Appetlate Court was not<\/p>\n
 ‘juis”ti.\ufb01eci__in that regard.\n<\/p>\n
 i”‘iFhei ‘<'ii'4fe.t\u00a7tion therefore, that would arise is as to<\/p>\n
 whetherigin such circumstances, keeping in View the<\/p>\n
dgeciaraticin that the piaintiffs son belongs to the said caste<\/p>\n
the triai Court was justified in issuing the mandatory<\/p>\n
'injunction for carrying out appropriate corrections.<\/p>\n
it<\/p>\n
11<\/span><\/p>\n
9. in this regard, it is needless to mention as already<\/p>\n
noticed above, the documents which are at Exs.l?.l”,– <\/p>\n
D2 would indicate that the caste of the son of:.thce’eep1aintiVff <\/p>\n
has been wrongly indicated as Hindu’ ‘Chaluva_duifdvespiteXthe<\/p>\n
caste being Hindu l\\\/ladiga as per the.pce:itii’icate’ issued  ._<\/p>\n
Competent authority. The pia_intiff  fact_had”issuedi’<\/p>\n
notice as contemplated. uI1de–riV:t3-ec”tion i80’~0f Civil
\nProcedure Code, see1\u00ab:in:g–.thev to carry out
\nappropriate eorrectionspiinidie  But the
\nSame was  and therefore, in
\nsuch  [a10Dr013riate to compel the
\nciefendaintsii to C  of mandatory injunction.<\/p>\n
Therefore, the V-.trial’1Cot:.rt in fact was justified and the lower<\/p>\n
.i”App’ellate Court wasmnot justified in reversing the judgment<\/p>\n
 and  fthie trial Court.\n<\/p>\n
 10L ~V.”pj—-‘l”h}=erefore, for all the reasons stated above, the<\/p>\n
questi.on.aof” law raised by this Court would have to be<\/p>\n
aiiisvyfered in favour of the appellant, which is accordingly<\/p>\n
eene; In that View, the judgment dated 09.09.2004 passed<\/p>\n
it  the lower Appellate Court is set aside and the judgment<\/p>\n
A<\/p>\n
-“9<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
and decree dated 28.08.2003 passed by the trial Court in <\/p>\n
O.S No.12\/2003 is restored.\n<\/p>\n
In texms of the above, the appeai ‘al1\u20ac>we\u00a5\u00a2i,* ”<\/p>\n
however with no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
\ngab     <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Mariyamma vs The Deputy Commissioner Koppal … on 24 February, 2010 Author: A.S.Bopanna IN THE HIGH COURT OF’ KARNATAI{_A_ V: ‘:A. CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD_.:__ if 1 DATED THIS THE 24th DAY ();1f\u00abfA\u00bbVi?\u00bb”EBR’1EJ;\u00a3i.1′:’i\u00a7;_V\ufb01'(“.’V:.1v(}AV ” BEFoRE=..__ V 4’ ” ‘ THE I-ION’BLE MR. JUSTICE” 3 R.S.A N0. i6E.’g,’_2Co\u20aci’-\u00ab BETWEEN: K ‘ V’ Smt. […]<\/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-159335","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nMariyamma vs The Deputy Commissioner Koppal ... on 24 February, 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\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mariyamma vs The Deputy Commissioner Koppal ... on 24 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-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=\"2010-02-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-12-16T07:49:35+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mariyamma vs The Deputy Commissioner Koppal … on 24 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-12-16T07:49:35+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1772,\"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\\\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010\",\"name\":\"Mariyamma vs The Deputy Commissioner Koppal ... on 24 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-12-16T07:49:35+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mariyamma vs The Deputy Commissioner Koppal … on 24 February, 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":"Mariyamma vs The Deputy Commissioner Koppal ... on 24 February, 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\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mariyamma vs The Deputy Commissioner Koppal ... on 24 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-12-16T07:49:35+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mariyamma vs The Deputy Commissioner Koppal … on 24 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-12-16T07:49:35+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010"},"wordCount":1772,"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\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010","name":"Mariyamma vs The Deputy Commissioner Koppal ... on 24 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-12-16T07:49:35+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-vs-the-deputy-commissioner-koppal-on-24-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mariyamma vs The Deputy Commissioner Koppal … on 24 February, 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\/159335","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=159335"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159335\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=159335"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=159335"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=159335"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}