{"id":160284,"date":"2009-08-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-08-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009"},"modified":"2017-02-19T14:38:43","modified_gmt":"2017-02-19T09:08:43","slug":"m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009","title":{"rendered":"M.A.Francis vs Paily on 7 August, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
M.A.Francis vs Paily on 7 August, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCRL.A.No. 1487 of 2003()\n\n\n1. M.A.FRANCIS, MANAGER, KAISONS RUBBER\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. PAILY, THULAMATTATHIL, PROPRIETOR,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.S.K.AJAYAKUMAR\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN\n\n Dated :07\/08\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                      M.N. KRISHNAN, J.\n                       ---------------------------\n                   CRL.A.NO.1487 OF 2003\n                       ------------------------------\n              Dated this the 7th day of August, 2009\n\n                           JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
     This is an appeal preferred against the order of acquittal<\/p>\n
passed by the J.F.C.M, Perumbavoor in C.C.No.1369\/1998.        It<\/p>\n
was a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I.Act which has<\/p>\n
ended in acquittal.  The complainant herein is the Manager of<\/p>\n
Kyson Rubber Industries and he had filed a private complaint<\/p>\n
for prosecuting the case under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. It is<\/p>\n
his case that a cheque has been issued towards the discharge of<\/p>\n
the liability which when presented for encashment        returned<\/p>\n
with the endorsement of insufficiency of funds.<\/p>\n
       2. The defence appears to be that there was some<\/p>\n
transaction between the complainant and the accused and at<\/p>\n
that point of time, a blank cheque was given as          security<\/p>\n
which had been misused by the complainant\/Manager to file a<\/p>\n
case of this nature. In the trial court, PWs 1 and 2 were<\/p>\n
examined and Exts.P1 to P10(a) were marked.<\/p>\n
     3. The points that arise for determination in the appeal<\/p>\n
are: (1) Whether the court below was right in acquitting the<\/p>\n
                               2<\/span>
\nCRL.A.NO.1487\/03<\/p>\n
accused (2) Whether there are sufficient materials to hold<\/p>\n
the accused guilty under Section 138 of the N.I.Act and (3) In<\/p>\n
case of guilt, what will be the proper sentence?<\/p>\n
     4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant in detail<\/p>\n
and perused the records.    The learned counsel had attacked<\/p>\n
the findings of the court below on the grounds that (1) in spite<\/p>\n
of the  best documents available, the court below        had not<\/p>\n
relied upon on them (2) that the complainant\/Manger         has<\/p>\n
succeeded in proving that he is    competent to represent the<\/p>\n
firm and (3) that the transaction is not properly proved.<\/p>\n
    5. A perusal of the    complaint would reveal that the<\/p>\n
complainant has described himself as the Manager of Kyson<\/p>\n
Rubber Industries . The very averment in the complaint would<\/p>\n
show that the accused had purchased thread rubber from<\/p>\n
Kyson Rubber Industries and towards the amount due for the<\/p>\n
said purpose    had issued the cheque. So, it is very clear on<\/p>\n
reading the complainant that the complaint is filed       by the<\/p>\n
Manager of the firm. It is not filed in his individual capacity.<\/p>\n
When it is so, the next point to be considered is whether he is<\/p>\n
competent to represent the firm.      The learned counsel had<\/p>\n
                                  3<\/span>
\nCRL.A.NO.1487\/03<\/p>\n
produced Ext.P1 partnership deed. In Ext.P1 partnership deed,<\/p>\n
clause    17 shows that it is the Managing Partner who is<\/p>\n
entitled to represent the firm in litigations etc. Ext.P2 is the<\/p>\n
power of attorney executed by both the partners of the firm in<\/p>\n
favour of one       Francis, who is the Manager, wherein it is<\/p>\n
specifically stated that he is competent to represent the firm<\/p>\n
in all the matters whether       civil or criminal.  The power of<\/p>\n
attorney bears       the date 30.4.1998 and there is some<\/p>\n
suspicion    about the correctness of the date .        Ext.P7 is<\/p>\n
another letter of authorization which       again shows that the<\/p>\n
said Francis is duly authorized to prosecute            even this<\/p>\n
proceeding.     It is a letter dated 21.5.1998. It is the well<\/p>\n
settled principle now that when an amount is due to a<\/p>\n
company or a firm and suppose a cheque is issued in favour<\/p>\n
of that company or firm, the complainant             can certainly<\/p>\n
prosecute the matter even if a person who supports that did<\/p>\n
not have a proper power of attorney or authorisation.<\/p>\n
    6. In the decision reported in M\/s. M.M.T.C Ltd.v. M\/s.<\/p>\n
Medchl Chemicals and Pharma (P) Ltd., (AIR 2002 SC<\/p>\n
182) it has been held        that “the only  eligibility criterion<\/p>\n
                                4<\/span>
\nCRL.A.NO.1487\/03<\/p>\n
prescribed by Section 142 is that the complaint under Section<\/p>\n
138 must be by the payee or the holder in due course of said<\/p>\n
cheque. This criterion is satisfied as the complaint is in the<\/p>\n
name and on behalf of the appellant company in that particular<\/p>\n
case, the court further held that even         prosecuting that<\/p>\n
aspect the company can at any stage rectify that defect. At<\/p>\n
a subsequent stage the company can send a person who is<\/p>\n
competent to represent the company.\n<\/p>\n
     7. So far as this case is concerned, Exts.P2, P7 and the<\/p>\n
evidence of PW2 convincingly establish that the Manager of<\/p>\n
the firm was authorised to represent the firm in civil and<\/p>\n
criminal matters   and    so even if   there is  any  suspicion<\/p>\n
regarding       the power of     attorney on initiation of the<\/p>\n
proceedings, certainly it is cured by the subsequent documents<\/p>\n
and    therefore, on that ground, the court below should not<\/p>\n
have rejected the complaint. This point found in favour of the<\/p>\n
complainant.\n<\/p>\n
    8. Point No.2.  This point deals with the facts. It is true<\/p>\n
that in the     complaint it is averred    that  an amount of<\/p>\n
Rs.60,285\/= is due for the purchase of       rubber threads on<\/p>\n
                               5<\/span>
\nCRL.A.NO.1487\/03<\/p>\n
14.5.1998. The court below found that there is inconsistency<\/p>\n
between     this statement and the materials available and<\/p>\n
therefore, non suited the complaint.     The complainant has<\/p>\n
produced Ext.P8.     They are two invoices.    The said invoice<\/p>\n
would show that 702.5 kg         at the rate of 45 amount to<\/p>\n
Rs.36,355\/= purchased    on    30.4.1998 by the   firm of the<\/p>\n
accused and again on 7.5.1998 460.5 kg at the same rate<\/p>\n
amount to Rs.23,830.50 was purchased. Total amount comes<\/p>\n
to Rs.60,185. So Ext.P8 proves      that  the amount     stated<\/p>\n
above as outstanding is due on 14.5.1998 on which     date the<\/p>\n
cheque is said to be issued. The company has also produced<\/p>\n
other accounts to prove the same. Over and above this, PWs<\/p>\n
1 and 2      had been examined. PW1 has spoken about the<\/p>\n
transaction and PW2 also has stated so. Just because there is<\/p>\n
small inconsistency between the averment in the complaint and<\/p>\n
the actual materials, one cannot jump to the conclusion that<\/p>\n
there is no amount due at all from the accused to the<\/p>\n
complainant firm. Men may lie but circumstances never will<\/p>\n
lie. The documents      available convincingly establish    the<\/p>\n
circumstances and the amount due.\n<\/p>\n
                                 6<\/span>
\nCRL.A.NO.1487\/03<\/p>\n
    9. Under such circumstances, it has to be stated that the<\/p>\n
cheque has issued towards the discharge of the liability.  From<\/p>\n
other materials one can see that            the other   statutory<\/p>\n
requirements also had been complied with i.e., notice being<\/p>\n
sent in proper time etc and therefore, I find        the accused<\/p>\n
guilty under Section 138 of the N.I.Act reversing the finding<\/p>\n
of acquittal passed by the learned Magistrate.<\/p>\n
     10. Now turning to the question of sentence.          If the<\/p>\n
accused wants to wipe of the liability, I do not want to send<\/p>\n
him    to  the prison   and    therefore, I feel the sentence of<\/p>\n
imprisonment till the rising of the court and a compensation<\/p>\n
of Rs.61,185\/= will be sufficient.\n<\/p>\n
     11. In the result, the criminal appeal is allowed and<\/p>\n
disposed of as follows:\n<\/p>\n
     1. The order of acquittal is set aside.\n<\/p>\n
     2. The accused is found guilty under Section 138 of the<\/p>\n
N.I.Act and is convicted there under and he is sentenced to<\/p>\n
undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay a<\/p>\n
compensation of Rs.60,185\/=       to   the   complainant  and in<\/p>\n
default    to undergo S.I for a period of three months.      The<\/p>\n
                             7<\/span>
\nCRL.A.NO.1487\/03<\/p>\n
accused shall appear before the court below on 27.10.2009<\/p>\n
for  receiving   the sentence and making payment      of the<\/p>\n
compensation failing which, the trial court shall execute the<\/p>\n
sentence.\n<\/p>\n
                             M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE<\/p>\n
cl<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court M.A.Francis vs Paily on 7 August, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM CRL.A.No. 1487 of 2003() 1. M.A.FRANCIS, MANAGER, KAISONS RUBBER … Petitioner Vs 1. PAILY, THULAMATTATHIL, PROPRIETOR, … Respondent 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE For Petitioner :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU For Respondent :SRI.S.K.AJAYAKUMAR The Hon’ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-160284","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nM.A.Francis vs Paily on 7 August, 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\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M.A.Francis vs Paily on 7 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-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=\"2009-08-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-02-19T09:08:43+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\\\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M.A.Francis vs Paily on 7 August, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-19T09:08:43+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1214,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009\",\"name\":\"M.A.Francis vs Paily on 7 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-19T09:08:43+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M.A.Francis vs Paily on 7 August, 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":"M.A.Francis vs Paily on 7 August, 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\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M.A.Francis vs Paily on 7 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-08-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-02-19T09:08:43+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\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M.A.Francis vs Paily on 7 August, 2009","datePublished":"2009-08-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-19T09:08:43+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009"},"wordCount":1214,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009","name":"M.A.Francis vs Paily on 7 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-08-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-19T09:08:43+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-a-francis-vs-paily-on-7-august-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M.A.Francis vs Paily on 7 August, 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\/160284","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=160284"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/160284\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=160284"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=160284"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=160284"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}