{"id":163787,"date":"1970-02-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1970-02-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970"},"modified":"2015-04-11T23:24:07","modified_gmt":"2015-04-11T17:54:07","slug":"chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970","title":{"rendered":"Chinnamuthu Gounder And Ors. Etc vs P.A.S. Perumal Chettiar on 16 February, 1970"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Chinnamuthu Gounder And Ors. Etc vs P.A.S. Perumal Chettiar on 16 February, 1970<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1970 AIR 1197, \t\t  1970 SCR  (3) 704<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A Grover<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Grover, A.N.<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nCHINNAMUTHU GOUNDER AND ORS. ETC.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nP.A.S. PERUMAL CHETTIAR\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n16\/02\/1970\n\nBENCH:\nGROVER, A.N.\nBENCH:\nGROVER, A.N.\nSHAH, J.C.\nHEGDE, K.S.\n\nCITATION:\n 1970 AIR 1197\t\t  1970 SCR  (3) 704\n 1970 SCC  (1) 451\n\n\nACT:\n     Madras  Cultivating Tenants Protection Act (Mad. 25  of\n1955),\tss. 3(2)(d) and 6A--Scope of.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n    The\t respondent, who was the occupancy ryot of  an\tinam\nvillage,  filed\t a  suit for eviction of  his  lessees,\t the\nappellants  (who  were\tthe cultivating\t tenants),  and\t for\npossession  of\tthe land.  The appellants set  up  occupancy\nrights in themselves as a defence.  The lower courts and the\nHigh  Court  found that the appellants wilfully\t denied\t the\ntitle of the respondent. and decreed the suit.\n    On\tthe question of the jurisdiction of the civil  court\nto try the suit,\n    HELD  :  Under s. 6A of the Madras\tCultivating  Tenants\nProtection Act, 1955, the civil court is bound to transfer a\nsuit  for possession to the Revenue Divisional Officer\tonly\nif  the\t defendant proves that he is  a\t cultivating  tenant\nentitled  to  the  benefits under the Act, that\t is,  if  he\nprove,-, the existence of both the conditions, namely :\t (a)\nthat he is a cultivating tenant, and (b) that he is entitled\nto the benefits under the Act., Under s. 3(2)(d) of the Act,\nhowever, a tenant cannot claim the benefits under the Act if\nhe wilfully denies the title of the landlord.  Therefore, as\nthe appellants became disentitled to the benefits under\t the\nAct, the civil court was competent to try the suit. [706  D-\nF]\n    The\t  fact that the civil court has to decide  initially\nsome questions within\t the  jurisdiction  of\tthe  Revenue\nCourt does not affect the interpretation of s. 6A. [706 F-G]\n     V. Kuppuswami &amp; Ors. v. Sri Subramaniaswami Devasthanam\nat  Thiruvidakkazhi by its Trustees Kanakasabhai Pillai\t and\nMuthuramalinga\t Chettiar  &amp;  Ors.  (1958)  1  M.L.J.\t208,\napproved.\n     M.\t S.  Ramachandra Sastrigal  v.\tKuppuswami  Vanniar,\n[1961] 1 M.L.J. 335, referred to.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>     CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeals Nos. 11 16<br \/>\nto 1118 of 1966.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Appeals  by special leave from the judgment  and  order<br \/>\ndated  September 2, 1965 of the Madras High Court in  Second<br \/>\nAppeals Nos. 299, 335 and 346 of 1961.\n<\/p>\n<p>     S. Mohan, Kumaramangalam and R. Gopalakrishnan, for the<br \/>\nappellants (in all the appeals).\n<\/p>\n<p>     D.\t Narsaraju,  G.\t Narasimham  and  K.  Jayaram,\t for<br \/>\nrespondent (in all the appeals).\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">705<\/span><\/p>\n<p>     The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\n     Grover,  J. These three appeals by special leave  arise<br \/>\nout of three suits filed by the plaintiff for declaration of<br \/>\nhis  title to the lands described in the schedules  attached<br \/>\nto the plaints and for possession of those lands as also for<br \/>\narrears of rent and for mesne profits.\tThe suit lands\t-are<br \/>\nsituate\t in  an inam village which is an estate\t within\t the<br \/>\nmeaning\t of the Madras Estates Land Act (Act 1 of  1908)  as<br \/>\noriginally  enacted.  The plaintiff claimed that he and\t his<br \/>\npredecessors  in title were ryots under the inamdars of\t the<br \/>\nvillage\t and that the defendants were lessees and were\tonly<br \/>\nunder-tenants.\t The  defence  of  the\tdefendants  who\t are<br \/>\nappellants  before  us\twas  that  the\tplaintiff  and\t his<br \/>\npredecessor  in\t title were land-holders and not  ryots\t and<br \/>\nthat the defendants had occupancy rights by long  possession<br \/>\nand by virtue of the provisions of the aforesaid Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The trial court, the lower appellate court and the High<br \/>\nCourt have negatived the contentions of the appellants.\t  It<br \/>\nhas  been  concurrently\t found that the\t plaintiff  and\t his<br \/>\npredecessors  were  ryots  under the inamdar  and  that\t the<br \/>\nappellants  were only undertenants under leases\t granted  by<br \/>\nthe predecessors in title of the plaintiff.  In other  words<br \/>\nit has been held that the plaintiff is the occupancy  tenant<br \/>\nand  that the defendants were mere cultivating tenants.\t  In<br \/>\norder  to determine the point which has been pressed  before<br \/>\nus it is unnecessary to state other facts.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The   sole\t question  on  which  arguments\t have\tbeen<br \/>\naddressed  is  whether the civil court had  jurisdiction  to<br \/>\ndecree the suit in respect of possession in the presence  of<br \/>\nthe provisions of the Madras Cultivating Tenants  Protection<br \/>\nAct  1955  (Act\t XXV of 1955) hereinafter  called  the\tAct.<br \/>\nSection\t 2(a) defines &#8220;cultivating tenant&#8221; to mean a  person<br \/>\nwho  carries  on personal cultivation on  any  land-under  a<br \/>\ntenancy\t agreement and includes any person who continues  in<br \/>\npossession after the determination of the tenancy  agreement<br \/>\nas  also  the  heirs  of  such\tperson.\t  According  to\t the<br \/>\nprovisions  of s. 3 no cultivating tenant shall\t be  evicted<br \/>\nfrom the holding at the instance of the landlord whether  in<br \/>\nexecution of a decree or order of a court or otherwise;\t but<br \/>\nthat  is subject to sub,sec. (2) which contains the  various<br \/>\ncontingencies\tin  which  the\ttenant\tcannot\t claim\t the<br \/>\nprotection  of\tthe Act.  Clause (d) which  appears  in\t the<br \/>\nexceptions  reads &#8220;who has wilfully denied the title of\t the<br \/>\nlandlord to the land&#8221;.\tAccording to Explanation I a  denial<br \/>\nof the landlord&#8217;s title under the bone fide mistake of\tfact<br \/>\nis   not  wilful  within  the  meaning\tof   the   aforesaid<br \/>\nclause.Sections\t 6 and 6-A are material for our purpose\t and<br \/>\nmay be reproduced :\n<\/p>\n<p>L8SupCI\/70-15<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">706<\/span><br \/>\n\t\t  S. 6 &#8220;No civil court shall, except to\t the<br \/>\n\t      extent   specified  in  section\t3(3),\thave<br \/>\n\t      jurisdiction  in respect of any  matter  which<br \/>\n\t      the Revenue Divisional Officer is empowered by<br \/>\n\t      or  under\t this Act to determine\tand  no\t in-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t      junction\tshall  be granted by  any  court  in<br \/>\n\t      respect of any action taken or to be taken  in<br \/>\n\t      pursuance, of any power conferred by or  under<br \/>\n\t      this Act.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t  S. 6A &#8220;If in any suit before any Court for<br \/>\n\t      possession  of, or injunction in relation\t to,<br \/>\n\t      any  land,  it  is  proved  by  affidavit\t  or<br \/>\n\t      otherwise that the defendant is a\t cultivating<br \/>\n\t      tenant  entitled to the benefits of this\tAct,<br \/>\n\t      the Court shall not proceed with the trial  of<br \/>\n\t      the   suit  but  shall  transfer\tit  to\t the<br \/>\n\t      Divisional  Officer who shall  thereupon\tdeal<br \/>\n\t\t\t    with  and  dispose of it as though it<br \/>\n were  an<br \/>\n\t      application   under  this\t Act  and  all\t the<br \/>\n\t      provisions of this Act shall apply to such  an<br \/>\n\t      application and the applicant.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>The  clear  import of s. 6A is that in any suit\t before\t any<br \/>\ncivil court for possession if the defendant proves not\tonly<br \/>\nthat he is a cultivating tenant but also that he is entitled<br \/>\nto  the\t benefits  of the Act the civil court  is  bound  to<br \/>\ntransfer  it  to the Revenue Divisional Officer\t and  cannot<br \/>\nproceed\t to  try and dispose it of itself.  In\tthe  present<br \/>\ncase  it  has been found by the High Court as also.  by\t the<br \/>\ntrial  court  that the appellants had  wilfully\t denied\t the<br \/>\ntitle  of  the respondent who is the  landlord.\t  They\tthus<br \/>\nbecome\t disentitled   to  the\tbenefits  under\t  the\tAct.<br \/>\nConsequently  the  civil court had jurisdiction\t to  proceed<br \/>\nwith   the  trial.  and\t there\twas  no\t question   of\t its<br \/>\ntransferring  the suit to, the Revenue\tDivisional  Officer.<br \/>\nThere  has  been  a consistent course of  decisions  of\t the<br \/>\nMadras High Court that in order to attract the applicability<br \/>\nof  s.\t6-A both the conditions must co-exist,\tnamely,\t the<br \/>\ndefendant must be a cultivating tenant within the meaning of<br \/>\nthe  Act  and he should be entitled to the benefits  of\t the<br \/>\nAct.  If both these conditions are not satisfied no question<br \/>\nof  any transfer under s. 6-A will arise.  The\tcivil  court<br \/>\nmay  have  to determine, for the purpose -of coming  to\t the<br \/>\nconclusion, whether a suit has to be transferred under s. 6-<br \/>\nA,  certain questions which are within the  jurisdiction  of<br \/>\nthe revenue court under the Act.  But that cannot affect the<br \/>\ninterpretation of the words &#8220;cultivating tenant entitled  to<br \/>\nthe benefits of the Act&#8221;.  In V. Kuppuswami &amp; Others v.\t Sri<br \/>\nSabramaniaswami\t  Devasthanam  at  Tiruvidakkazhi   by\t its<br \/>\nTrustees  Kanakasabhai Pillai and Muthuramalinga Chettiar  &amp;<br \/>\nOthers(&#8216;) this view was clearly expressed by the Madras High<br \/>\nCourt.\t In  a\tlater Bench decision in\t M.  S.\t Ramachandra<br \/>\nSastrigal v. Kuppuswami Vanniar(2) the existence of a  third<br \/>\ncondition was also<br \/>\n(1) (1958) 1 M. L. J. 208.\n<\/p>\n<p>(2) (1961)1 M. L.J. 335.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">707<\/span><\/p>\n<p>emphasised.  It was said that s. 6-A would become applicable<br \/>\nif the defendant is a cultivating tenant and is entitled  to<br \/>\nthe  benefits of the Act and further he must show that on  a<br \/>\ntransfer  of  the  proceedings\tto  the\t Revenue  Divisional<br \/>\nOfficer he would be in a position to obtain one or the other<br \/>\nstatutory reliefs provided for in his favour under the\tAct.<br \/>\nIt  is\tunnecessary, in the present case, to deal  with\t the<br \/>\nthird requirement mentioned in the judgment of the  division<br \/>\nbench.\t The  appellant\t have been  clearly  found  to\thave<br \/>\nwilfully denied the title of the landlord.  That disentitled<br \/>\nthem to the benefits of the Act by virtue of the  provisions<br \/>\ncontained  in s. 3 (2) (d).  The trial of the suit was\tthus<br \/>\ncompetent in the civil court which had complete jurisdiction<br \/>\nto dispose of the same.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The  appeals fail and are dismissed but in view of\t the<br \/>\nentire\tcircumstances there will be no order as to costs  in<br \/>\nthis court.\n<\/p>\n<p>V.P.S.\t\t\tAppeals dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">708<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Chinnamuthu Gounder And Ors. Etc vs P.A.S. Perumal Chettiar on 16 February, 1970 Equivalent citations: 1970 AIR 1197, 1970 SCR (3) 704 Author: A Grover Bench: Grover, A.N. PETITIONER: CHINNAMUTHU GOUNDER AND ORS. ETC. Vs. RESPONDENT: P.A.S. PERUMAL CHETTIAR DATE OF JUDGMENT: 16\/02\/1970 BENCH: GROVER, A.N. BENCH: GROVER, A.N. SHAH, J.C. [&hellip;]<\/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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-163787","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Chinnamuthu Gounder And Ors. Etc vs P.A.S. Perumal Chettiar on 16 February, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Chinnamuthu Gounder And Ors. Etc vs P.A.S. Perumal Chettiar on 16 February, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1970-02-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-04-11T17:54:07+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\\\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Chinnamuthu Gounder And Ors. Etc vs P.A.S. Perumal Chettiar on 16 February, 1970\",\"datePublished\":\"1970-02-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-11T17:54:07+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970\"},\"wordCount\":1197,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970\",\"name\":\"Chinnamuthu Gounder And Ors. Etc vs P.A.S. Perumal Chettiar on 16 February, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1970-02-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-11T17:54:07+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Chinnamuthu Gounder And Ors. Etc vs P.A.S. Perumal Chettiar on 16 February, 1970\"}]},{\"@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":"Chinnamuthu Gounder And Ors. Etc vs P.A.S. Perumal Chettiar on 16 February, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Chinnamuthu Gounder And Ors. Etc vs P.A.S. Perumal Chettiar on 16 February, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1970-02-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-04-11T17:54:07+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\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Chinnamuthu Gounder And Ors. Etc vs P.A.S. Perumal Chettiar on 16 February, 1970","datePublished":"1970-02-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-11T17:54:07+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970"},"wordCount":1197,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970","name":"Chinnamuthu Gounder And Ors. Etc vs P.A.S. Perumal Chettiar on 16 February, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1970-02-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-11T17:54:07+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chinnamuthu-gounder-and-ors-etc-vs-p-a-s-perumal-chettiar-on-16-february-1970#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Chinnamuthu Gounder And Ors. Etc vs P.A.S. Perumal Chettiar on 16 February, 1970"}]},{"@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\/163787","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=163787"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/163787\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=163787"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=163787"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=163787"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}