{"id":164642,"date":"2002-12-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-12-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002"},"modified":"2015-11-11T10:57:02","modified_gmt":"2015-11-11T05:27:02","slug":"r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002","title":{"rendered":"R. Kapilnath (Dead) Through Lr vs Krishna on 13 December, 2002"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">R. Kapilnath (Dead) Through Lr vs Krishna on 13 December, 2002<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: R Lahoti<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: R.C. Lahoti, Brijesh Kumar.<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  2474 of 1999\n\nPETITIONER:\nR. Kapilnath (Dead) through LR.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nKrishna\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 13\/12\/2002\n\nBENCH:\nR.C. LAHOTI &amp;  BRIJESH KUMAR.\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n<p>R.C. Lahoti, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe suit premises are a residential house comprised in CTS<br \/>\nNos. 936 &amp; 939 of Ward II of Hubli City.  The premises are owned by<br \/>\na temple  a religious institution but not  under the management of the<br \/>\nState Government.  The adoptive father of the respondent, Late<br \/>\nShankarbhat, was pujari and manager of the temple.  The appellant<br \/>\nwas inducted as a tenant in the suit premises by Late Shankarbhat.<br \/>\nShankarbhat has, through a registered deed of adoption,\t adopted the<br \/>\nrespondent as his son who is presently pujari and manager of the<br \/>\ntemple. The appellant has been paying rent to the respondent.  It is not<br \/>\nin doubt, nor in dispute, that whatever be the ownership of the suit<br \/>\npremises the respondent is certainly the rent collector.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe respondent claiming himself to be the owner of the<br \/>\npremises filed a suit for eviction of the tenant-appellant on the<br \/>\ngrounds available under Clauses (h) and (p) of sub-Section (1) of<br \/>\nSection 21 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter &#8216;the<br \/>\nAct&#8217;, for short).  Availability of ground under clause (h) has been<br \/>\nnegated while the Court of Munsif upheld the entitlement of<br \/>\nrespondent to a decree under Clause (p).  The appellant preferred a<br \/>\nrevision before the first Additional District Judge, Dharwad under<br \/>\nSection 50(2) of the Act and subsequently a revision petition to the<br \/>\nHigh Court under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure.  Both<br \/>\nhave been dismissed conforming the decree for eviction under Clause\n<\/p>\n<p>(p) abovesaid.\tThe finding arrived at by all the courts is that the<br \/>\ntenant has built or acquired vacant possession of a suitable building.<br \/>\nThe tenant has preferred the present appeal by special leave.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe principal submission of Ms. Kiran Suri, the learned counsel<br \/>\nfor the appellant, centres around an amendment made in the Act by<br \/>\nKarnataka Act No.32 of 1994.  It was submitted by the learned<br \/>\ncounsel for the appellant that the suit premises belong to a temple<br \/>\nwhich is a religious institution.  The Karnataka Rent Control Act,<br \/>\n1961 was enacted inter alia to control evictions of tenants.  The Act<br \/>\nhas a wide application.\t However, sub-Section (7) of Section 2<br \/>\nprovides that nothing in this Act shall apply to certain premises<br \/>\nspecified in the several clauses therein.  One of the categories of the<br \/>\npremises, excepted from the application of the Act, was &#8216;any premises<br \/>\nbelonging to a religious or charitable institution under the<br \/>\nmanagement of the State Government&#8217;.  By the Karnataka Rent<br \/>\nControl (Amendment) Act, 1994 (Act No.32 of 1994) which came<br \/>\ninto force with effect from 18th May, 1994, the words &#8220;under the<br \/>\nmanagement of the State Government&#8221; were deleted. The effect of the<br \/>\namendment is that while earlier only the premises belonging to a<br \/>\nreligious or charitable institution under the management of the State<br \/>\nGovernment were exempted from the operation of the Act now<br \/>\nsubsequent to the amendment, the scope of excepted category has<br \/>\nbeen enlarged so as to cover all premises belonging to a religious or<br \/>\ncharitable institution without regard to the fact whether they are under<br \/>\nthe management of the State Government or not.\tThe proceedings for<br \/>\neviction of a tenant under Section 21 of the Act are maintainable in a<br \/>\nCourt which, as defined in Clause (d) of Section 3, is the Court of<br \/>\nMunsif.\t So far as the suit premises are concerned, the proceedings<br \/>\nwere initiated in the year 1986 in the Court of Munsif. Revision<br \/>\npetition before Additional District Judge was filed in the year 1990<br \/>\nand came to be decided on 14th September 1995.\tDuring the<br \/>\npendency of the revision, the 1994 Amendment came into force.  The<br \/>\neffect of the amendment is that the suit premises were taken out of the<br \/>\noperation of the Act and therefore the Munsif lost jurisdiction to try a<br \/>\ncase for eviction over such premises.  The learned Additional District<br \/>\nJudge ought to have taken note of this change in law and directed the<br \/>\nproceedings held before the Munsif to be a nullity for want of<br \/>\njurisdiction in view of the change in law.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe above submission of the learned counsel has been stated<br \/>\nonly to be rejected.  It is pertinent to note that the proceedings in the<br \/>\nCourt of Munsif had already stood concluded by the time the<br \/>\namendment came into force.  It is not disputed that Amendment Act<br \/>\nNo.32 of 1994 has not been given a retrospective operation and there<br \/>\nis nothing in the Act to infer retrospectivity by necessary implication.<br \/>\nThe Act has been specifically brought into force w.e.f. the 18th day of<br \/>\nMay, 1994.  The learned counsel for the appellant cited a number of<br \/>\ndecisions laying down the law as to how an amendment in legislation<br \/>\nbrought into force during the pendency of legal proceedings has to be<br \/>\ngiven effect to.  Without stating the decisions so cited, suffice it to<br \/>\nobserve that all those decisions deal with substantive rights having<br \/>\nbeen created or abolished during the pendency of legal proceedings<br \/>\nand depending on the legislative intent and the language employed by<br \/>\nthe Legislature in the relevant enactment, this Court has determined<br \/>\nthe impact of the legislation on pending proceedings and the power of<br \/>\nthe Court to take note of change in law and suitably mould the relief<br \/>\nconsistently with the legislative changes.  So far as the present case is<br \/>\nconcerned, the only submission made by the learned counsel for the<br \/>\nappellant is that the effect of the amendment is to deprive the Court of<br \/>\nMunsif of its jurisdiction to hear and decide proceedings for eviction<br \/>\nover such premises as the suit premises are.  In other words, it is a<br \/>\nchange in forum brought during the pendency of the proceedings.\t The<br \/>\ncorrect approach to be adopted in such cases is that a new law<br \/>\nbringing about a change in forum does not affect pending actions,<br \/>\nunless a provision is made in it for change over of proceedings or<br \/>\nthere is some other clear indication that pending actions are affected.<br \/>\n(See Principles of Statutory Interpretation, Justice G.P. Singh, 8th<br \/>\nEdition, 2001, p.442)\tWe have already indicated that the Act does<br \/>\nnot bring about a change in forum so far as the pending actions are<br \/>\nconcerned.  Moreover by the time the amendment came into force, the<br \/>\nproceedings before the Munsif had already stood concluded and the<br \/>\ncase was pending at the stage of revision before the Additional<br \/>\nDistrict Judge.\t Further we find that an objection laying challenge to<br \/>\nforum&#8217;s competence was not raised before the learned Additional<br \/>\nDistrict Judge nor the objection was  taken before the High Court in<br \/>\nthe civil revision preferred by the appellant.\tIt was not taken as a<br \/>\nground in the special leave petition.  It has been taken only by way of<br \/>\na separate petition filed subsequently and seeking leave to urge<br \/>\nadditional grounds.   Such an objection cannot be allowed to be urged<br \/>\nso belatedly.  However, we have already held the argument based on<br \/>\n1994 Amendment as of no merit.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt was next submitted that though a petition for eviction under<br \/>\nSection 21(1)(p) of the Act can be filed by a landlord and it is not<br \/>\nnecessary that he must also be the owner of the premises yet it is<br \/>\nnecessary that the petitioner must claim himself to be only a landlord<br \/>\nand not an owner.  The learned counsel further submitted that the<br \/>\nrespondent has claimed himself to be the owner of the premises which<br \/>\nclaim is inconsistent with his being a mere rent collector on behalf of<br \/>\nthe temple and so the claim for eviction at his instance should have<br \/>\nbeen refused.  This submission too is wholly devoid of any merit.  A<br \/>\npetition for recovery of possession of any premises can be filed by the<br \/>\nlandlord against the tenant within the meaning of Section 21(1).<br \/>\nClause (h) of Section 3 includes in the meaning of &#8216;landlord&#8217; any<br \/>\nperson who is for the time being receiving or entitled to receive rent in<br \/>\nrespect of any premises whether on his own account or on account or<br \/>\non behalf, or for the benefit of any other person etc.\tIt cannot be<br \/>\ndoubted nor has it been disputed that the respondent is &#8216;landlord&#8217;<br \/>\nwithin the meaning of Section 3(h) abovesaid. Though the appellant<br \/>\nclaimed himself to be an owner also so long as he has been found to<br \/>\nbe a landlord he is entitled to maintain the action for eviction under<br \/>\nSection 21(1) (p).  The plaintiff or petitioner may claim a higher right<br \/>\nand may succeed in proving only a smaller right or entitlement to<br \/>\nrelief but that would not result in disentitling the plaintiff or petitioner<br \/>\nfrom succeeding so long as the smaller right successfully<br \/>\nsubstantiated by him is enough in law to entitle him to a relief against<br \/>\nthe defendant.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tFor the foregoing reasons, the appeal is held to be devoid of any<br \/>\nmerit and liable to be dismissed.  It is dismissed with costs<br \/>\nthroughout.  The decree for execution shall not be available for<br \/>\nexecution for a period of four months from today subject to the<br \/>\nappellant clearing all the arrears of rent and filing the usual<br \/>\nundertaking __\tboth within a period of three weeks from today __ for<br \/>\ndelivering vacant and peaceful possession to the landlord-respondent<br \/>\non the expiry of the said period of four months\t and   continuing to<br \/>\nclear the arrears falling due month by month till then.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India R. Kapilnath (Dead) Through Lr vs Krishna on 13 December, 2002 Author: R Lahoti Bench: R.C. Lahoti, Brijesh Kumar. CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 2474 of 1999 PETITIONER: R. Kapilnath (Dead) through LR. RESPONDENT: Krishna DATE OF JUDGMENT: 13\/12\/2002 BENCH: R.C. LAHOTI &amp; BRIJESH KUMAR. JUDGMENT: J U D G M E [&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-164642","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>R. Kapilnath (Dead) Through Lr vs Krishna on 13 December, 2002 - 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\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"R. Kapilnath (Dead) Through Lr vs Krishna on 13 December, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002\" \/>\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=\"2002-12-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-11-11T05:27:02+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\\\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"R. Kapilnath (Dead) Through Lr vs Krishna on 13 December, 2002\",\"datePublished\":\"2002-12-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-11T05:27:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002\"},\"wordCount\":1568,\"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\\\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002\",\"name\":\"R. Kapilnath (Dead) Through Lr vs Krishna on 13 December, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2002-12-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-11T05:27:02+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"R. Kapilnath (Dead) Through Lr vs Krishna on 13 December, 2002\"}]},{\"@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":"R. Kapilnath (Dead) Through Lr vs Krishna on 13 December, 2002 - 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\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"R. Kapilnath (Dead) Through Lr vs Krishna on 13 December, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2002-12-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-11-11T05:27:02+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\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"R. Kapilnath (Dead) Through Lr vs Krishna on 13 December, 2002","datePublished":"2002-12-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-11T05:27:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002"},"wordCount":1568,"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\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002","name":"R. Kapilnath (Dead) Through Lr vs Krishna on 13 December, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2002-12-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-11T05:27:02+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kapilnath-dead-through-lr-vs-krishna-on-13-december-2002#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"R. Kapilnath (Dead) Through Lr vs Krishna on 13 December, 2002"}]},{"@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\/164642","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=164642"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/164642\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=164642"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=164642"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=164642"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}