{"id":166299,"date":"2009-05-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-05-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009"},"modified":"2016-08-08T09:19:10","modified_gmt":"2016-08-08T03:49:10","slug":"subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009","title":{"rendered":"Subhaprayan Communication vs Sri D S Ananth on 29 May, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Subhaprayan Communication vs Sri D S Ananth on 29 May, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: P.D.Dinakaran(Cj) & V.G.Sabhahit<\/div>\n
\u00a5N 'ma HIGH comm' 0? KARNATAKA AT B\u00a3\u00a3\u00a7\u00a7C}y'5sL:\u00a7I\u00a7*'ET\u00bb   \n\nDATED THIS THE 29th DaY\"0F.w,Y .;\u00e9d\u00a739__  \n    % V \nTHE HOIWBLE MR. P. 9. \u00a7Ir\u00a7\u00a7\"KAR$N,~ \n.% Ar%3%%%i%L%%    \nTHE HOWBLE\"E13?.'JiES'1\u00a75IV\u00a7J\u00e9':\\?,V:(}$.;VS2%gBHA}4!I'I'\n\nwaif 1>\u00a7:'i'm'c}N  2009\n\n1 :SUBHAPRAY\u00a3?\u00a7N {ZOMMUNICATION\nmo 902\/4,' 13TH 1'v:A'm, 3RD BLOCK\nBEHIND SBY-I..;BAN\u00a7\u00a7,\"'RAJAJINAGAAR\nBANGAL.ORE- 19.') \" ,  COMMON\nV. REP B';'_PRO\u00a77' GIP HARISH BABU... ..PE3TITIONER\n\n V'  ._    A. H  ..... .. V\n\n     T. \n\n._ , S\/(;~..,m:~j\"vKNOwN TO PETITIONER\ng ' R\/_A'1*~ir_.Ic> 697\/A, IST BLOCK\n 3v--RD<-SfI'AG\u00a53, 13TH MAIN ROAD\n~~BAjSAVESHWARANAGAR COMMON\n13iaNGALORE~79.  RESPONDENT<\/pre>\n
 THESE W.Ps. ARE FILED PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE<\/p>\n
 RELEVANT RECORDS FROM THE 131′ ADDITIONAL
\n …_DISTRICI’ CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<\/p>\n
SWATHI COMPLEX, SHESHADRIPURAM AT BANGALORE
\nBEARING COMPLAINT NO. 740\/2008 AND ALSO APPEAL
\nPREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER AND AS WELL AS<\/p>\n
RESPGNDNET BEFORE THE STATE
\nREDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE _amR1:\\;G _ Nu. ._
\n205\/2009 AND 2459\/2008. ANLLTQ $37 “ASIDE, THE<\/p>\n
IMPUGKEE} ORDER 91′. 30.3.2009 VIQ’E3\u00ab.VANN1E\u00a7X\u00a2J–_APPEAL’<\/p>\n
NO. 2459\/08, 205\/09 TREATING.’IT[ ARBITRARY,AULTRA<\/p>\n
VIRUS AND CAPRICIOUS.\n<\/p>\n
These Writ petitions (Wang ug \ufb01g fa;~e’1″1″‘m” inary V’<\/p>\n
i-Icaring on this day, SABHAI~iF_I_’_}.3′ .-,_1::;a_;lc the fc\ufb01lm\ufb01ing.
\nThese two.   by the \ufb01rst<\/p>\n
respondent   in Appeal<\/p>\n
No.2O5j”2O()’9 ;5.9n’\u00ab  of  State Consumer
\nRcdm.sv.\u00a7\u00e9;1′–  (hereinafter called -{he<\/p>\n
State _Co1i3.i::1.issio;;);’)  aggrieveti by the order dated<\/p>\n
 ‘~  _  ‘appeal \ufb01lcd. by the appellant herein is<\/p>\n
 }:f371;2.iss:\u00a2:\u00a2fi~  Appeal No,2=459\/2008 filed by the<\/p>\n
 ‘a’;1. \u00a7  by enhancing the compensation to<\/p>\n
 Rs.\u00e95,<)"'<)u\/ \u00a7 with interest at 12% per annum from the date<\/p>\n
x V' V. 6f'  before the District Forum til} the date of<\/p>\n
  and 'also cast of Rs.5,G00\/ — payabiac by the<\/p>\n
u Wwtri\ufb01oner herein.\n<\/p>\n
xi’<\/p>\n
2. The \ufb01rst respondent herein \ufb01led <\/p>\n
No.’?40\/ 2003 on the me of : Addl.\n<\/p>\n
Disputes Redressal Forum, Bangalore (Rural)  8e :11:   <\/p>\n
(Urban), Bangalore, seeking for a 1-:iii’ect:io&1:1″._to <\/p>\n
to pay a sum of Rs.’?5,00{)\/\u00ab-\n<\/p>\n
along with refund of   \u00abP: the”.\n<\/p>\n
complainant towards eest of  witti’i:r.te1’est at 8%<\/p>\n
p.a. It is averted in  the complain’ ant<\/p>\n
intended \ufb01e  Jagatguaaggempxe had purchased ‘to’
\nand AV e\u00a2keesV1″‘\u00a3\u00a7o-:$\u00a7’e~..:eanga1om to Bhubaneshwar and<\/p>\n
Bhuhaneshkxm} ta hf\ufb01attja g\u00e9iom on 1.12.2007 from Opposite<\/p>\n
 V’  . Pa’rtyi\ufb01’- 15-thev~– petittetieftvherein who is the agent of Opposite<\/p>\n
   ‘Zfhe date of departure was on 5.12.200′? at<\/p>\n
   t had insisted the first Qpposite<\/p>\n
 Party ~~’;.iesue particularly the ticket of King\ufb01sher Flight<\/p>\n
 . ‘~?_”‘  reaches Bhubaneshwar at about 9.20pm and he was<\/p>\n
 \u00e9wzrare of the fact that dinner would be served in the \ufb02ight<\/p>\n
 so that he need net; go out for dinner. He cancelled his<\/p>\n
retum journey ticket because there was no direct Kin\ufb01sher<\/p>\n
V”\n<\/p>\n
\ufb02ight from Bhubaneshwar to Bangelore and   ” = <\/p>\n
in the cost of ticket \ufb01rm: Bhuba::{e;shx\u00a7:ag\u00a7f2u$= the’<\/p>\n
complainant cancelled his It.=~tm_f_11 jofxrqzt\u00e9y  was  L.<\/p>\n
\n\npurchased from first Opposite    Party\nbeing the agent of     \ufb02ights\nhad given the ticket    instead of\n<\/pre>\n
King\ufb01sher  cost ‘King\ufb01sher \ufb02ight is
\nRs.4,085\/\u00ab\u20ac’eett”‘.tt3e.”:tie1tet”of Air Deccan \ufb02ight is
\nRs.2,’.7;j1’St)V\u00a7.%t ‘   t3a1’ty though colhected
\nRs.4,0\u20ac.t*5[Ve  “of air ticket of King\ufb01sher \ufb02ight<\/p>\n
had issued atizeiviiclfet of  Deccan Flight, the cost of which<\/p>\n
 V’  _is   .15\/”–V  amounts to unfair trade practice by<\/p>\n
  The complainant hoping of getting food in<\/p>\n
 \ufb02ight dtcl not take food before boarding the<\/p>\n
 \ufb02ight  when he reached the airport he was restricted and<\/p>\n
t  aliow him to board Kin\ufb01sher \ufb02ight instead they<\/p>\n
e  aggev\u00e9ed him to beam Air Deccan \ufb02ight by saying that it was<\/p>\n
wttte ticket of Air Beccan and not the \ufb01cket of King\ufb01sher<\/p>\n
\ufb02ight. When he enquired in the counter, to his utter shock<\/p>\n
x)’<\/p>\n
5<\/span><\/p>\n
he came to know that the \ufb01mt opposite party, the agcot had
\nchoatcd him by collecting the fate of Kizn\ufb01sher <\/p>\n
issued him the ticket of Air Deccan   .\n<\/p>\n
de\ufb01ciency of scivicc and unfair t:z’a\u00a31g;>Jracti:.:iie”o.’o[  ” = <\/p>\n
the opposite party, There was delajzv of <\/p>\n
in the schedule time of the  ‘r\ufb01eV_\u00a2ompI:ajiig;\u00a5:t,  .<\/p>\n
Bhubaneshwar at about 12   ‘_\u00a711\u20ac1n1g’ v;ht. Since
\nno food was sewed in;   f\u00e9\ufb01fzhout food<\/p>\n
thmug\ufb01 out   being a senior
\ncitizcn \u00e9.=11c’–i<_hca1"tV  su\ufb01cred giddizmss and hunger<\/p>\n
and   food throughout the night as<\/p>\n
  Eoilaops  vvhotels were closed and the complainant<\/p>\n
 V   Eiil-_health and hardship due to the act of the<\/p>\n
 rty which amounts to de\ufb01ciency of sezwicc<\/p>\n
  21115311".  .V  4 trac:it:\u00a2 Practice by the apposim party. A\ufb01cr<\/p>\n
x V' V. f'ei1:m_ in g \ufb01om the Bhubaneshwar, the complain' ant visited<\/p>\n
  opposite party's of\ufb01ce and informed him about the<\/p>\n
  of the jountzey but the \ufb01rs': opposite party shouted and<\/p>\n
abused him in ba\ufb01 language in front of his sta\ufb02 and other<\/p>\n
V'<\/p>\n
customers and therefore to direct the opposiu:   -\u00ab .. <\/p>\n
Rs.75,000]– as compensation and <\/p>\n
along with refund of di\ufb01czesgcc   2   L'<\/p>\n
comp1am' ant towards the    \u00e9tgong with<\/p>\n
interest at 24% per amaimm;\n<\/p>\n
3. The pei\ufb01tion was     respondent\n\ncontending. \u00e9tl\u00e9at    com\ufb01lamant is\n\n<\/pre>\n
misco11ceizr\u00a2’\u00a7i;j_fiiiftsgaus-, .Vd\u00e9vc\u00a7i\u00a3i–efz\ufb01erits and he is tzying to
\nIaarase\ufb01 opfxjsif\u00e9’   befom the Forum and the
\ncomplaint’ Lj,s  liaiiic   It is averted that it is<\/p>\n
 the  visited the o\ufb01ice of the opposite<\/p>\n
1%  ;.}and booked the air ticket of his choice and<\/p>\n
 “ihc availability of \ufb02ights \ufb01om Bangalore to<\/p>\n
ahixbanesizs\u00e9ar on the said date and time and purchased air<\/p>\n
   ticlget. ‘I’\ufb01c \ufb01nther averment that he purchased the ticket of<\/p>\n
‘% ‘A-King\ufb01sher \ufb02ight from Bangalore to Bhubaneshwar and paid<\/p>\n
….E\u00e9s.4,{)85\/=~ However, \ufb01ckct of Air Deccan \ufb02ight cost of<\/p>\n
Rs.2,715\/-n was given to him is not correct. The other<\/p>\n
\\.)’<\/p>\n
averment made in the complaint that   M<\/p>\n
expecting that food Wouiri be sc:’vr:\u20aci”‘i.:1. the:  u<\/p>\n
and \ufb02ight reached Bhubancsh\ufb01\u00e9t  ”\n<\/p>\n
Su\ufb01emd hardship is dcnii\u00a7\u00ab:Ev:vL””  th\u00a7r\u20acf9i\ufb01::  for” V L’<\/p>\n
dismissai of the complaint.\n<\/p>\n
4. The mama   ‘dates: 3.10.2903<\/p>\n
allowed the   to pay a<\/p>\n
sum of Rs.   collected towards air
\nticket “at Rs.1V,i\u00a73L\u00a75-; \u00a5a:16:;:g”*-v\u00a7rith ‘cost of Rs.2,000\/-. Being<\/p>\n
aggrievedx”    V.’\u00a7idcr of the Qis\ufb02ict Forum, the<\/p>\n
  Appeal 530.2459] 2008 and the<\/p>\n
1% ;:)c&:1.:{1:io1V1icir.i3cj: 1’t~:i:t_1 preferred Appeal 310.205 \/2009 on the m of<\/p>\n
 t3:iiT;:.._V5,3t,\u00e9:it:\u00bb\u20ac9V”_'{.’,g)3:f;\u00a71:3:i;.ission and the State Commission by order<\/p>\n
dafbd  con\ufb01rmed the order passed by the Bisaict<\/p>\n
  E+”‘o.1:’_;1m ‘I\u20acgaJ:tiing \u00e9e\ufb01cicncy of service on the part of the<\/p>\n
‘ja\u00e9iitibner herein and entitiemcnt cf complainant \ufb01n”<\/p>\n
  -\u00bbv.\u00bb:;:}ompensation and refund of di\ufb02brence amount of the air<\/p>\n
ticket and further held that the compensation awarded to<\/p>\n
V’<\/p>\n
the complainant is liable to be enhanced to Rs. <\/p>\n
Rs.10,000[- and awaxded cast of Rs.5,ooo\/_ gs \u00ab. <\/p>\n
m\ufb01lnd Rs. 1,335 \/ – being excess \ufb02ight  <\/p>\n
p.a. from December 12007g’u’1_1_. Q16′ .dr31’tc    L.<\/p>\n
accordingly, allowed the  \u00a333? tiit:  and
\ndismissed the complair_it~._   ‘?\u00a7_L*:uvvLA’p\u00a2ti\u00b0tio::rr\u00a7rVAvvhcrein in
\nAppeal 510.205\/2009.  said order of<\/p>\n
the State Cqxnm  c\u00a3a’.\u00a3&i  these two writ<\/p>\n
petitio\ufb01s    “~r#1;)p_ei}\u00a3rr.t in Aypeal. 910.205\/2009
\nand  respo;;\u00a2”e;;t_’T’i:;.jL:}=;;~;pea1 No.2459\/2008 before the<\/p>\n
Stat\u00a2–ComIriia$\u00a3on.  that the petitioner haszi issueci<\/p>\n
  t,ic1;:<=ji as pct t1*1"t: "'t1t=':qVucs'\u00a3 of the respondent herein and<\/p>\n
   on the part of the petitioner had not<\/p>\n
  and the District Forum and the State<\/p>\n
 Commi\ufb01s\u00e9on were not justi\ufb01trd in directing tha petitioner to<\/p>\n
A f 'the compensation awarded to the complainant.<\/p>\n
S. We have heard the learned coamsei appearing for<\/p>\n
the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
\\)><\/p>\n
6. The learned counsei appearing for  H<\/p>\n
reiterated the grounds urged in the   \u00ab  w. <\/p>\n
submitted that there was no Zde\ufb01cienfcjf .’  ‘ <\/p>\n
negligence on the part of \ufb011e__ pe\ufb01iiipiier  {he  ;<\/p>\n
complaint \ufb02ied by the respeiizient   ifiave been
\ndismissed and State  ‘s=.\u00a7ie’1:1t~-tp haee  ed the
\nappeal \ufb01led by the   dismissed the<\/p>\n
appeal \ufb01led by     ..\n<\/p>\n
 ‘Wee V  _\/ agreful consideration to the
\nconten’\u00a3:io\ufb01.__4 cg   counsel appearing for the<\/p>\n
pe\ufb01tipixer and Vnsczmtinised the material on record.<\/p>\n
V     on Iecord would clearly Show that the<\/p>\n
 ‘ieomplainant-respondent herein was issued a<\/p>\n
 ticket~~f;:;t*;.Rs.4,085\/ – being the cost of air fare for travelling in<\/p>\n
A “\u00a7Aiiff1’ig\u00a3_isher \ufb02ight from Bangakore to Bhubaneshwar on<\/p>\n
 1.200′? is not disputed. The material on record would<\/p>\n
H i”urther Show that though the amount of Rs.4,085\/~ was<\/p>\n
collected towards air fare, the petitioner had to travel by Air<\/p>\n
\\\/’<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
Deccan Flight in which the fare fmm    <\/p>\n
Bhubaneshwar is Rs.2,71S\/- .  \u00bb{_>(‘:1V::itic:)7;m;1*\u00a2<\/p>\n
\ufb01aveled in Air Deccan \ufb02ight  <\/p>\n
Bhubancshwar at 12 0’ cbck ‘:11; midmg_f ‘h.:\u00a7;n&1;V\u00a7eaati:oner A<\/p>\n
could not get any food ‘and. Q-$4’1e.t; _:fa’\u00a2\ufb01_ities”is-\u00a3:1dvi\u00a7.putab]e.
\nThere is a concuxmnt L.Li qu:\u00a2stion of fact that
\nthere is dc\ufb01cie;r;\u00a2\u00a7,*.__ of   “of the petitioner<\/p>\n
herein Whq .%:\u00e9:.\u00ab=.;_1   io igggvex in Air Deccan<\/p>\n
\ufb02ight ” L_\u00a5a. nw  .–}?\u00a3ubaneshwar by paying
\nRs,4,08’5[V-” thotzgh: of the air fame was only<\/p>\n
Fa’s.2,’?_15\/ —   w\u00e9oncurrcnt \ufb01nding is based upon<\/p>\n
 V’  .the :;i\u00a7ai’s1iai on  ‘including the air tickets issucci by the<\/p>\n
   and the certi\ufb01cate to show that the<\/p>\n
\ufb01etj\ufb01o\ufb01er.  is anthoris\ufb01d to issue ticket for Kin\ufb01sher<\/p>\n
  Deccan Airlinesqespondents 3 and 4 in the<\/p>\n
A ‘ _” The material on record would also c\ufb01early show<\/p>\n
 that Air Deccan \ufb02ight reached Bhubancshwar in the<\/p>\n
 and petitioner could not get food and had to<\/p>\n
\\}<\/p>\n
11<\/span><\/p>\n
remain hungxy and petitioner is aged and L”  <\/p>\n
\ni\ufb02ness has also beer: proved by    <\/p>\n
9. Having regard to thc7ah__ove    u<\/p>\n
it is clear that the State  hgis-1@i1y ‘\u00a2:nhaneed
\nthe compensation   from
\nRs.i0,GOO\/– by  the  ;ER s.25,0o0\/_ and
\nawarded cost gof  12’\/o per annum<\/p>\n
from the     f.he District Forum \ufb01ii<\/p>\n
the d\u00e9t: of ‘ha3″a1so con\ufb01rzracd the order for
\nIefunci ,3.’35f — = the excess air fare to the<\/p>\n
compiziinant wifhVVii1tex=c:tst at % per annum iimm \ufb01ccember,<\/p>\n
 giate of paymcnt. There is no merit in the<\/p>\n
  beamed counsel appearing for the<\/p>\n
petifionezir’  pe\ufb01tioner is not guilty of \u00e9e\ufb01cmncy of service<\/p>\n
 V’  the compensation awarded is exmssive.<\/p>\n
 –At:cn\u00a7\u00a7ding1y, we 110% that, no gound Whatever is made out –<\/p>\n
    intcrfexing with the order passed by the State<\/p>\n
Commission allowing the appeal No.2459\/ 2008 \ufb01led by the<\/p>\n
V’<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
respondent herein and dismissing the expp:-f:al    <\/p>\n
petitioner Itteztzixr\ufb01ppeai 205\/’ 2009 daigd 7 <\/p>\n
pass the following order:\n<\/p>\n
The writ petri\ufb01ons are dgsmisseq; K,<\/p>\n
 Justice:<\/p>\n
\n\n3d\/Q\n\n %%%%      4'  Iudd\u00e9.\n\n\"\u00abV\u00e9b__Hostj_~v_\u00a5e\u00a7['Ne\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Subhaprayan Communication vs Sri D S Ananth on 29 May, 2009 Author: P.D.Dinakaran(Cj) & V.G.Sabhahit \u00a5N ‘ma HIGH comm’ 0? KARNATAKA AT B\u00a3\u00a3\u00a7\u00a7C}y’5sL:\u00a7I\u00a7*’ET\u00bb DATED THIS THE 29th DaY”0F.w,Y .;\u00e9d\u00a739__ % V THE HOIWBLE MR. P. 9. \u00a7Ir\u00a7\u00a7”KAR$N,~ .% Ar%3%%%i%L%% THE HOWBLE”E13?.’JiES’1\u00a75IV\u00a7J\u00e9’:\\?,V:(}$.;VS2%gBHA}4!I’I’ waif 1>\u00a7:’i’m’c}N 2009 1 :SUBHAPRAY\u00a3?\u00a7N {ZOMMUNICATION mo 902\/4,’ 13TH 1’v:A’m, 3RD […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-166299","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSubhaprayan Communication vs Sri D S Ananth on 29 May, 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\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Subhaprayan Communication vs Sri D S Ananth on 29 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-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=\"2009-05-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-08-08T03:49:10+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Subhaprayan Communication vs Sri D S Ananth on 29 May, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-05-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-08T03:49:10+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1679,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009\",\"name\":\"Subhaprayan Communication vs Sri D S Ananth on 29 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-05-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-08T03:49:10+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Subhaprayan Communication vs Sri D S Ananth on 29 May, 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":"Subhaprayan Communication vs Sri D S Ananth on 29 May, 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\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Subhaprayan Communication vs Sri D S Ananth on 29 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-05-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-08-08T03:49:10+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Subhaprayan Communication vs Sri D S Ananth on 29 May, 2009","datePublished":"2009-05-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-08T03:49:10+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009"},"wordCount":1679,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009","name":"Subhaprayan Communication vs Sri D S Ananth on 29 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-05-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-08T03:49:10+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhaprayan-communication-vs-sri-d-s-ananth-on-29-may-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Subhaprayan Communication vs Sri D S Ananth on 29 May, 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\/166299","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=166299"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/166299\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=166299"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=166299"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=166299"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}