{"id":159657,"date":"2010-11-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-11-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010"},"modified":"2016-09-14T11:43:27","modified_gmt":"2016-09-14T06:13:27","slug":"the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010","title":{"rendered":"The Manager vs Hanumantha Reddy on 25 November, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
The Manager vs Hanumantha Reddy on 25 November, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: L.Narayana Swamy<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE \n\nDATED THIS ON THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER \n\nBEFORE\n\nTHE HONELE MR. JUSTICE   1'\n\nM.F.A. No. 10393 OF 2o07GIm'fI.O[ I\"  \n\nBETWEEN:\n\nTHE MANAGER,  -\nNATIONAL INSURANCE CO-  \nDIVISIONAL OFFICE,   _  \nKUMARA KRUPA ROAD, BANGALORE\" \nNOWREPRESENTED BY  =\nREGIONAL MANAG_ER,_  I    ~\nNATIONAL   \nREGIONAL     \nSUBHARAM CO1\\\/IPLEX, 144, M\u00a7'G.ROAD,f.\nBANGALORE:560O.O'D1.*1:   \n\n _ .      . _' :APPELLAN'I'\n{BY SRI.A.S.K.RISHN_!'--_\\ SWAMY;*~AEV.)\n\nAND:\n\nV1,; ~.3ANI,jI\u00a3IAN'1\"HA   .\n S\/O. GAOVIINOAI-:PA,\n'ANOWIIAGEDAEIOLIT 67 YEARS\nR,\/O, PALYA,\nVENKATAPURA POST,\n\n  PAVAGAI1A~TAjLUK, TUMKUR DIST.\n\n\".__f{;R.NAGA}%3tHUSHANA REDDY,\n.S,\/0;KR1SHNA REDDY,\n\nE  NQW_AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS.\n\nO. DEVALAKERE, K.T.HALLI POST,\n\n  .,,I?AVAGADA TALUK.\n\n  *{EIf SRI.S.K.VENKATA REDDY, AF\/. FOR R-1}\n\n: RESPONDENTS<\/pre>\n
MFA FILED U\/S 173(1) 02? Mv ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT
\nAND AWARD DATED: 18.04.2007 PASSED IN MVC NO. 591;’2005
\nON THE FILE or ADDITIONAL MACT, MADHUGIR1. AWARBENDQ A<\/p>\n
COMPENSATION OF RS.2,03,8IO\/- INTEREST AT 8% PQAJ<\/p>\n
THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALISATION.<\/p>\n
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMIssioi\\H*:~iig\u00b03.. DAY\u00ab,. fm:I%:-~ V. <\/p>\n
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWINCS:\n<\/p>\n
JUDGM.:t\u00ab:N’r   <\/p>\n
Challenge by the appellant the’<\/p>\n
judgment and award dated’  ONO391\/2005
\non the \ufb01le of the Additional .C].aims Tribunal,<\/p>\n
Madhugiri on the ;i.;r\u00a2g;::d of iisibiiity =  claim.<\/p>\n
2.  ti’i’eVVV–inr1pugned judgment and<\/p>\n
award has awarded  of Rs.2,03,810.00.\n<\/p>\n
3. “IE_{3:'<';I-'A22. isd the_VVF1IR.V' The vehicle number mentioned in<\/p>\n
the  f\u00a7\u00a33;j'i:6\ufb01](H"8580. However, without there being any<\/p>\n
 basia,~.newV'\\feh.1cie"'i\\E0.KA–06\/D3434 has bee implicated in<\/p>\n
 the case". n  "s'I'ribuna1 without examining the same, has<\/p>\n
 liability on the appellant and therefore the<\/p>\n
 "appeal seeking for setting aside the impugned<\/p>\n
'V  A jidgrnent and award.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
4. The accident occurred on 14.7.2003. According to<\/p>\n
the complainant he has been taken to the hospitai<\/p>\n
Rammohan Reddy and S P Venkatareddy   <\/p>\n
hospitai his statement has been ],”\u20ac>COi”d.e’d”.L  <\/p>\n
Constable by name D Huchaiah. In <\/p>\n
Hero Honda motor cycle is mentio’r1:e’d, Itis. men_t_ioried”that it’<\/p>\n
was driven in a rash  dashed
\nagainst the claimant and  from the spot
\nleaving the motor    for offences
\npunishable    to be registered.\n<\/p>\n
Panchanan:ia”VE\u00a7:.”i24:V  are drawn. EXP4
\ndiscloses  But in the Mahazar
\nEi<.P5   14.8.2003 a month after the
\n  by Sri H Siddaiah, Head<\/p>\n
 Ex.P5 reveals the truth that a false<\/p>\n
oiaim e. madevdagainst the vehicle KA–06\/L–3434 for the<\/p>\n
Vethatddearlier vehicle KA–16\/H–'8580 was not insured.<\/p>\n
 xiearned counsel refers EX.P7 IMV report wherein at<\/p>\n
 .   No.2 requisition has been referred on 22.8.2003 and<\/p>\n
 there is a delay in sending the requisition. No damage to the<\/p>\n
<<\/p>\n
vehicle is noticed in the report. Therefore, the learned<\/p>\n
counsel submits that there is a false claim and in the ab'sen.ce<\/p>\n
of examining the I O. or producing cogent and A <\/p>\n
evidence, the claim petition ought to   <\/p>\n
5. On the contrary, the learriecl counsel <\/p>\n
submits that insurance has not  any   eigamining
\nthe Investigating Of\ufb01cer  :.t1je:eharge’isheet. The
\ncharge sheet is filednafter fF’W–l has stated
\nin the    furnished the
\nvehicle  the complainant was
\nnot knowinlgnthe  “in a state of injury he was
\nshifted to hospital  not in a position to furnish the
\ncorrect  nurnber…_a.nd the eye witnesses who have been<\/p>\n
 in :yFlTR-.have given the present vehicle number.<\/p>\n
5….vHence there inconsistency in the claim. In support of<\/p>\n
-efjvhissubniissitsn, the learned counsel relied upon judgment of<\/p>\n
Tf’thi’ef in M F A No.7493\/2007 {MVJ between Bajaj Allianz<\/p>\n
 Insurance Co. Ltd., vs., SInt.Lakshmamma 8: others<\/p>\n
:ii\u00ab-..Tn’disposed of on 25.9.2007 where this court has held that<\/p>\n
 unless the charge sheet is challenged, it has to be accepted.<\/p>\n
i<\/p>\n
6. The records do not disclose the permission <\/p>\n
the appellant under Section 170 of the M V Act.  <\/p>\n
said factor is immaterial in View of theifacttthat  ‘lnsnrance<\/p>\n
Company has challenged its liability. <\/p>\n
7. On the basis of the complaint rnade:\n<\/p>\n
Crime No.79 \/ 2003 is  the ‘H1*id’er of the
\nvehicle KA–16\/H–858O Heropkpnehaei’tlrhete:4e3:ei_e.. The FIR has
\nbeen forwarded to” Ma;gistrate.'”‘ 3f’here…V.should have been<\/p>\n
some reference in  charge’.'[‘fsbeet as to the involvement of<\/p>\n
the vehicle ether mentioned in the FIR. There is
\nno complaint eiicept. llonlevnfiade at the earliest point of time
\nirnplica.te\u00abvehicle No.KA–06\/L–3434. EX.P4 is<\/p>\n
  panchanama drawn on 19.7.2003 about 5<\/p>\n
‘l5….c1ays  thevlelaticident where vehicle number has been<\/p>\n
-.l.l.C’_jf:.efer.red as”lviA–O6\/L–3434. The rnahazar has been drawn on<\/p>\n
 that is, one month thereafter for which 1.0. D<\/p>\n
.  Head Constable is not examined. Ex.P7 the IMV<\/p>\n
 discloses no damages to any parts of the vehicle.<\/p>\n
There may be reason that afterithe accident, the vehicle must<\/p>\n
have been repaired. To that extent, no evidence is produced.
\nThe claimant has not fulfilled his duty in adducing cogent<\/p>\n
and corroborative evidence in support of his claim.<\/p>\n
8. Whenever a contention is raised as  <\/p>\n
implication of the vehicle, necessary etfoiftphasllto’  by”<\/p>\n
the parties to place linking materials    <\/p>\n
vehicle mentioned in the c1aini–.p’etition” is ‘inv-Q1v.ed=V in the’?<\/p>\n
accident. Though it is a rnatter.–cfriygllitp of th’c-clalimant to
\nclaim compensation, if a false_1’clainii’   -it is a fraud on<\/p>\n
the Court. Thererefe.  or ANDHRA<\/p>\n
PRADESH   RAO, (Am 2005 sc 3110) it
\nis held in Para\u00e9’-3})  as is well–known vitiates every
\ns~ol~en1n   ai1d–..=..I.ustice never dwell together. Fraud is<\/p>\n
a letter or words, which includes the other<\/p>\n
t it person’olrlauthority to take a definite determinative stand as a<\/p>\n
–4.l.l’_j:r.es’p.onse t’o__t1;he conduct of the former either by words or<\/p>\n
 It is not possible to express one way or the other as to<\/p>\n
   fraud committed in the case or otherwise. But what is the<\/p>\n
i<\/p>\n
concern. is that a person who approaches the Court should
\nnot feel, fraud or falsity prevails over justice. It never should<\/p>\n
happen. What I find from the instant case that the clair11ant<\/p>\n
has to satisfy the Tribunal by producing  <\/p>\n
and corroborative evidence as to how the new’vehi:c_le”came in” . <\/p>\n
the case than the one mentioned in the  ‘l’l1<f3re:fcr\u00e9.:"itgpisj\u00e9l<\/p>\n
case which has to be remand'ed"*~to the  –fresh:f'<\/p>\n
decision after affording opportunitylVto.both the p.arties to lead
\nfurther evidence and to produce  <\/p>\n
10. In the circurnstargilces;”the: appeal  disposed of. The<\/p>\n
matter stands 0  “claims tribunal for fresh<\/p>\n
considerationla-fter al’fordtingll.~’2opportunity to both the parties<\/p>\n
:_to’~l_ead  and”prod’uce materials. The Tribunal is also<\/p>\n
directed ‘-to-._talkef’coercive steps to secure the witnesses<\/p>\n
l  Since the claimant is a senior citizen aged<\/p>\n
 65 ‘years, the Tribunal is directed to dispose of the<\/p>\n
clai-n1~.peti.tion as expeditiously as possible but not later than<\/p>\n
 threefmonths from the date of receipt of copy of this order.<\/p>\n
 Both the parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on<\/p>\n
0. 20.12.2010. The Registry is directed to forward the records<\/p>\n
i<\/p>\n
forthwith. The Tribunal is directed to dispose of the elaim
\npetition without being in\ufb02uenced by any of the obseiV*\u00e9itio”nVs<\/p>\n
made in the present judgment.\n<\/p>\n
The amount in deposit is di1*ecte\u00a31″‘to–be  it<\/p>\n
appellant.\n<\/p>\n
akd*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court The Manager vs Hanumantha Reddy on 25 November, 2010 Author: L.Narayana Swamy IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE DATED THIS ON THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER BEFORE THE HONELE MR. JUSTICE 1′ M.F.A. No. 10393 OF 2o07GIm’fI.O[ I” BETWEEN: THE MANAGER, – NATIONAL INSURANCE CO- DIVISIONAL OFFICE, _ KUMARA KRUPA ROAD, […]<\/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-159657","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Manager vs Hanumantha Reddy on 25 November, 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\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Manager vs Hanumantha Reddy on 25 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-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=\"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-09-14T06:13:27+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\\\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Manager vs Hanumantha Reddy on 25 November, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-14T06:13:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1110,\"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\\\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010\",\"name\":\"The Manager vs Hanumantha Reddy on 25 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-14T06:13:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Manager vs Hanumantha Reddy on 25 November, 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":"The Manager vs Hanumantha Reddy on 25 November, 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\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Manager vs Hanumantha Reddy on 25 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-09-14T06:13:27+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\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Manager vs Hanumantha Reddy on 25 November, 2010","datePublished":"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-14T06:13:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010"},"wordCount":1110,"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\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010","name":"The Manager vs Hanumantha Reddy on 25 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-14T06:13:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-manager-vs-hanumantha-reddy-on-25-november-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Manager vs Hanumantha Reddy on 25 November, 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\/159657","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=159657"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159657\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=159657"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=159657"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=159657"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}