{"id":163724,"date":"2007-03-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-03-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007"},"modified":"2016-06-06T19:34:47","modified_gmt":"2016-06-06T14:04:47","slug":"t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007","title":{"rendered":"T.P.Krishnan vs K.G.Rajan on 16 March, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
T.P.Krishnan vs K.G.Rajan on 16 March, 2007<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nSA No. 221 of 1993()\n\n\n\n1. T.P.KRISHNAN\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. K.G.RAJAN\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.C.MOHANDAS\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR\n\n Dated :16\/03\/2007\n\n O R D E R\n                     M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.\n\n                       ...........................................\n\n                        S.A.No. 221     OF   1993\n\n                       ............................................\n\n          DATED THIS THE  16th  DAY OF MARCH, 2007\n\n\n                                  JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
      Defendants   in   O.S.484   of   1984   on   the   file   of   Munsiff<\/p>\n
Court,   Palakkad     are   the   appellants.     Plaintiff   therein   is   the<\/p>\n
respondent.      Respondent   instituted  the   suit  seeking  a  decree<\/p>\n
for   permanent   prohibitory   injunction   in   respect   of   the   plaint<\/p>\n
schedule property.   Plaint schedule property is ten cents in re-<\/p>\n
survey   No.1377\/1       one   cent   in   resurvey   No.1378\/1   and     0.05<\/p>\n
cents in R.S.1375\/1 of Puthoor Village of Palakkad Taluk. Case<\/p>\n
of respondent  was that he obtained  the property under  Ext.A1<\/p>\n
sale deed dated 3.1.64 from Narayani Ammal and her husband<\/p>\n
Krishan Iyer   who in turn obtained the right under Ext.A2 sale<\/p>\n
deed   dated   4.9.1942   from   G.P.Krishna   Iyer,   who   in   turn<\/p>\n
obtained the property in court auction sale in execution of the<\/p>\n
decree   in   O.S.130\/35.     It   was   contended   that   the   disputed<\/p>\n
property is the backyard portion of the house  in the   property<\/p>\n
originally   belonged   to   Narayana   Swamy   Iyer   who   in   turn<\/p>\n
assigned   it   to   Marathakambal   under   Ext.A3   assignment   deed<\/p>\n
dated   11.7.1912   which   in   turn   was   mortgaged   in   favour   of<\/p>\n
Krishna   Iyer   who   obtained   the   decree   in   O.S.130\/1935     and<\/p>\n
purchased   the   property   in   court   auction   sale   and   thereafter<\/p>\n
SA 221\/1993                            2<\/span><\/p>\n
sold   it   to   Narayani   Ammal   and   Krisha   Iyer   under   Ext.A2   in<\/p>\n
1942.     Respondent   contended   that   he   has   been   in   possession<\/p>\n
and enjoyment of the property and appellants have no manner<\/p>\n
of right,  title or possession of the property and therefore  they<\/p>\n
are   to   be   restrained   by   a   permanent   prohibitory   injunction<\/p>\n
from  trespassing into  the plaint  schedule  property.  Appellants<\/p>\n
in   their   written   statement     disputed   the   right,   title   and<\/p>\n
possession of the respondent and contended that the disputed<\/p>\n
property   originally   belonged   to   their   family   and   subsequently<\/p>\n
under   Ext.B1   partition   deed   dated   29.6.1984,   it   was   divided<\/p>\n
between   appellants   and   the   disputed   property   was   alloted   to<\/p>\n
the share of the first appellant and therefore respondent is not<\/p>\n
entitled to the decree sought for.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      2.     The   learned   Munsiff   framed   necessary   issues.     As     in<\/p>\n
the   written   statement   appellants   disputed   the   title   of   the<\/p>\n
respondent,   respondent   filed   I.A.1150\/95   to   amend   the   plaint<\/p>\n
by   paying   court   fee   under   Section   27(a)   of   Kerala   Court   Fees<\/p>\n
and   Suit   Valuation   Act   contending   that   as   the   title   of   the<\/p>\n
respondent   was   disputed   by   appellants,   it   is     necessary   to<\/p>\n
decide  the  question  of title  also.    The application  was  allowed<\/p>\n
and    court   fee   was  paid  under  Section  27(a).  Learned  Munsiff<\/p>\n
therefore considered the question of title also.   On the side of<\/p>\n
SA 221\/1993                             3<\/span><\/p>\n
respondent,   apart   from   himself   two   witnesses   were   examined<\/p>\n
and   fifty   two   documents   were   marked   apart   from   Exts.C1   and<\/p>\n
C2 reports and C3 plan.   On the side of appellants, apart from<\/p>\n
the   evidence   of   first   appellant,   two   other   witnesses   were<\/p>\n
examined and two exhibits were marked.   Learned Munsiff, on<\/p>\n
the   evidence,   found   that   the   disputed   property   is   part   of   the<\/p>\n
property   obtained   by   respondent   under   Ext.A1,   which   in   turn<\/p>\n
was part of the property assigned by Krishna Iyer under Ext.A2<\/p>\n
and obtained by him in court auction sale from Marathakambal<\/p>\n
who   derived   the   right   under   Ext.A3.     Learned   Munsiff   also<\/p>\n
found   that     Ext.B1   partition   deed   which   was   entered   into   by<\/p>\n
appellants prior to  the institution of the suit does not disclose<\/p>\n
the   derivation   of   title.   Though   at   the   time   of   evidence   DW1<\/p>\n
deposed   that   he   has   got   documents   to   prove   that   title,   it   was<\/p>\n
not   produced.   It   was   found   that   therefore   adverse   inference<\/p>\n
has to be   taken.   On the evidence, learned Munsiff found that<\/p>\n
respondent   has   title   and   possession   to   the   disputed   property<\/p>\n
and   granted   a   decree   in   favour   of   respondent.     Appellants<\/p>\n
challenged     the   decree   and   judgment   before   Sub   Court,<\/p>\n
Palakkad   in   A.S.24\/91.     Learned   Sub   Judge   reappreciated   the<\/p>\n
evidence   and   confirmed   the   decree   and   judgment   and<\/p>\n
dismissed the appeal.  It is challenged in this second appeal.<\/p>\n
SA 221\/1993                                4<\/span><\/p>\n
       3.   The second  appeal  was  admitted   after  formulating   the<\/p>\n
following substantial questions of law.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
i)Are   the   courts   below   correct   in   entering   a   finding   on   title<\/p>\n
when  suit is only for perpectual injunction  against defendants<\/p>\n
from   obstructing   plaintiff   from   putting   up   a   fence   on   the<\/p>\n
southern side of the plaint schedule property.<\/p>\n
ii)Are   the   courts   below   correct   in   entering   a   finding   on   the<\/p>\n
questions   of   title   and   possession,   when   there   is   difference   in<\/p>\n
the extent in Ext.A1, A2 and A3.\n<\/p>\n
\nIii)Are the courts below correct in granting a decree basing on<\/p>\n
the tax receipts when the sale certificate was not produced.<\/p>\n
       4.     Learned   counsel   appearing   for   appellants   and   the<\/p>\n
respondent were heard.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       5.  Though   substantial questions  of law were  framed  and<\/p>\n
it   was   argued   that   in   a   suit   for   injunction   question   of   title   is<\/p>\n
not   to   be   decided,   it   is   seen   from   the   records   that   when<\/p>\n
appellants   in   their   written   statement   denied   the   title   of   the<\/p>\n
respondent alleged in the plaint, plaint was got amended after<\/p>\n
paying   court   fee   as   provided   under   Section   27(a)   of   Kerala<\/p>\n
Court   Fees   and   Suit   Valuation   Act   and   that   too   on   the<\/p>\n
allegation  that   as  title  of respondent  was  denied,    question  of<\/p>\n
title has to be decided in the suit. On that ground court fee was<\/p>\n
SA 221\/1993                              5<\/span><\/p>\n
paid   under   Section   27(a)   of     Kerala   Court   Fees   and   Suit<\/p>\n
Valuation  Act.   In view  of the  said facts and payment of court<\/p>\n
fee under Section 27(a), court is bound to consider question of<\/p>\n
title also, even though the suit is only for injunction.  Therefore<\/p>\n
the decision of courts below on the question of title cannot be<\/p>\n
said   to   be   illegal   or   unwarranted.     On   the   other   hand,   in   the<\/p>\n
nature   and   circumstances   of   the   case,     a   decision   on   the<\/p>\n
question of title was mandatory. Therefore  on that ground the<\/p>\n
decisions of  courts below cannot be challenged.<\/p>\n
      6.   Respondent was setting up title and possession under<\/p>\n
Ext.A1   sale   deed   dated   3.1.1964.   The   right   obtained   under<\/p>\n
Ext.A1   was   the   right   which   was   obtained   by   Narayani   Ammal<\/p>\n
and   her   husband   Krishna   Iyer   under   Ext.A2   sale   deed   dated<\/p>\n
4.9.1942.   The   right   so   assigned   by   Narayani   Ammal   was   the<\/p>\n
right   derived   under   Ext.A2   from   G.P.Krishna   Iyer.     Ext.A2<\/p>\n
shows   that   the   right   assigned   by   Krishna   Iyer   was   the   right<\/p>\n
obtained   in   court   auction   sale   in   execution   of   the   decree   in<\/p>\n
O.S.130\/1935.     The   right   purchased   by   Krishna   Iyer   in   court<\/p>\n
auction  sale  was  the  right  obtained   by   Marathakambal   under<\/p>\n
Ext.A3   dated   11.7.1912   whereunder   Narayani   Ammal<\/p>\n
transferred her right in respect of an extent of 16 X 4 = six feet<\/p>\n
koles within the boundaries shown therein to  Marathakambal.<\/p>\n
SA 221\/1993                                6<\/span><\/p>\n
The   eastern   boundary   shown   in   Ext.A3   is   the   property     in   the<\/p>\n
possession  of  Marathakambal which in turn was purchased by<\/p>\n
Krishna   Iyer   in   court   auction   sale.     Even   though   the   sale<\/p>\n
certificate   was   not   produced,   from   Ext.A2     and   A3   it   is<\/p>\n
absolutely   clear   that   G.P.Krishna   Iyer   had   the   right,   which   in<\/p>\n
turn was assigned by him to Narayani Ammal and Krishna Iyer,<\/p>\n
which ultimately vested with respondent under Ext.A1. Though<\/p>\n
learned   counsel   appearing   for   appellants   vehemently   argued<\/p>\n
that   because   of   the   difference   in   the   extent   of   the   property<\/p>\n
covered under Exts.A1 to A3 and absence of survey number in<\/p>\n
Ext.A3, courts below should not have upheld the title set up by<\/p>\n
the respondent, a comparison of Exts.A1 to A3 would establish<\/p>\n
that   when   Ext.A3   relates   to       16   X   4   =   six   feet   koles,     under<\/p>\n
Ext.A2   along   with   the   said   property,   Krishna   Iyer   had<\/p>\n
transferred   his   rights   over   the   properties   having   the<\/p>\n
measurements   of   24   X   5,     six   feet   koles.     Though   re-survey<\/p>\n
number   of   the   property   covered   under   Ext.A3   was   not<\/p>\n
mentioned, in Ext.A2 survey number and extent were shown as<\/p>\n
ten   cents   in   R.S.No.1377     one   cent   in   R.S.No.1378   and   o.05<\/p>\n
cents in R.S.1375. The property transferred under Ext.A1 is the<\/p>\n
very   same   property.   The   plaint   schedule   property   is   also   the<\/p>\n
very same property.  Courts below, on appreciation of evidence,<\/p>\n
SA 221\/1993                            7<\/span><\/p>\n
found   that   respondent   has   title   to   the   property.   Reliance   was<\/p>\n
placed   on Exts.A1 to A3.   I find no reason   to differ with that<\/p>\n
finding.  In any event, that is not a substantial question of law.<\/p>\n
      7.     In   the   plaint   itself   though   respondent   has   contended<\/p>\n
that   there   is   an   old   latrine   building   in   the   plaint   schedule<\/p>\n
property,   appellants   in   the   written   statement   denied   the<\/p>\n
existence   of   the   latrine   building.       When   the   Commissioner<\/p>\n
inspected  the  property  and   submitted  Exts.C1  and  C2   reports,<\/p>\n
it was established that, the Commissioner could note remnance<\/p>\n
of the old latrine.  The way from the residential house was also<\/p>\n
noted by the Commissioner.  When this fact was brought out at<\/p>\n
the time of evidence, DW1 tried to explain it stating that it was<\/p>\n
the   latrine   available   in   their   property.   Courts   below,   on<\/p>\n
appreciation   of   evidence,   found   that   that   case   cannot   be<\/p>\n
believed as it is a result of an after thought and that supports<\/p>\n
the   case   of   the   respondent   that   the   plaint   schedule   property<\/p>\n
forms  part  of their  property   and has  been  in their   possession.<\/p>\n
Courts   below   appreciated   the   evidence   in   the   proper<\/p>\n
perspective and found that respondent  has been  in possession<\/p>\n
of   the   plaint   schedule   property.     The   said   finding   of   fact<\/p>\n
entered into, on the basis of evidence, cannot be interfered in<\/p>\n
exercise of the powers of this court under Section 100 of Code<\/p>\n
SA 221\/1993                       8<\/span><\/p>\n
of Civil Procedure especially when it is in accordance with the<\/p>\n
evidence tendered.  There is no merit in this appeal.<\/p>\n
         Second appeal is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                             M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE<\/p>\n
lgk\/-\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court T.P.Krishnan vs K.G.Rajan on 16 March, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM SA No. 221 of 1993() 1. T.P.KRISHNAN … Petitioner Vs 1. K.G.RAJAN … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.T.C.MOHANDAS For Respondent :SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH The Hon’ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR Dated :16\/03\/2007 O R D E R M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ……………………………………. […]<\/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-163724","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nT.P.Krishnan vs K.G.Rajan on 16 March, 2007 - 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\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"T.P.Krishnan vs K.G.Rajan on 16 March, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-03-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-06T14:04:47+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"T.P.Krishnan vs K.G.Rajan on 16 March, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-03-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-06T14:04:47+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1560,\"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\\\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007\",\"name\":\"T.P.Krishnan vs K.G.Rajan on 16 March, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-03-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-06T14:04:47+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"T.P.Krishnan vs K.G.Rajan on 16 March, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"T.P.Krishnan vs K.G.Rajan on 16 March, 2007 - 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\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"T.P.Krishnan vs K.G.Rajan on 16 March, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-03-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-06T14:04:47+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"T.P.Krishnan vs K.G.Rajan on 16 March, 2007","datePublished":"2007-03-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-06T14:04:47+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007"},"wordCount":1560,"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\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007","name":"T.P.Krishnan vs K.G.Rajan on 16 March, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-03-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-06T14:04:47+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-krishnan-vs-k-g-rajan-on-16-march-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"T.P.Krishnan vs K.G.Rajan on 16 March, 2007"}]},{"@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\/163724","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=163724"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/163724\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=163724"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=163724"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=163724"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}