{"id":166439,"date":"2009-06-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-06-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009"},"modified":"2018-02-04T01:03:31","modified_gmt":"2018-02-03T19:33:31","slug":"p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009","title":{"rendered":"P.M.Mohammed vs M\/S.Rageena Stores on 18 June, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
P.M.Mohammed vs M\/S.Rageena Stores on 18 June, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nAS.No. 509 of 1997(E)\n\n\n\n1. P.M.MOHAMMED\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. M\/S.RAGEENA STORES, PERUMBAVOOR\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.K.S.BABU\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR\n\n Dated :18\/06\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                     V. RAMKUMAR , J.\n           ==========================\n                     A.S. No. 509 of 1997\n           ==========================\n              Dated this the 18th day of June, 2009.\n\n                          JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
     The defendant in O.S. No. 359 of 1994 on the file of the<\/p>\n
Subordinate Judge’s Court, N. Paravur is the appellant in this<\/p>\n
appeal.   The said suit was for a realisation of a sum of<\/p>\n
Rs.25,655.65 with interest thereon at the rate of 18% per<\/p>\n
annum.\n<\/p>\n
     The case of the plaintiff can be summarised as follows:-<\/p>\n
     2. The plaintiff is a partnership firm conducting wholesale<\/p>\n
business in grocery articles at Perumbavoor. The defendant used<\/p>\n
to purchase on credit grocery items from the plaintiff’s shop. On<\/p>\n
28.11.1992,    the   defendant     issued   Ext.A1   cheque    for<\/p>\n
Rs.24,655.65 in favour of the plaintiff.    The said cheque was<\/p>\n
drawn on the Kizhakkambalam branch of the Federal Bank Ltd.<\/p>\n
On 23.11.1992, the plaintiff issued Ext.A4 lawyer notice to the<\/p>\n
effect that he would be presenting Ext.A1 cheque before the<\/p>\n
drawee bank on 28.11.1992 and calling upon the defendant to<\/p>\n
keep ready sufficient money in his account.       But, when the<\/p>\n
cheque was presented on 28.11.1992 before the collecting bank,<\/p>\n
it was dishonoured for the reason that there was no sufficient<\/p>\n
funds in the account of the plaintiff. The drawee bank issued<\/p>\n
Ext.A3 dishonour memo dated 22.12.1992 and the collecting<\/p>\n
bank issued Ext.A2 memo dated 02.03.1993 intimating the<\/p>\n
plaintiff about the dishonour. Even though the plaintiff sent a<\/p>\n
notice on 31.01.1994 demanding payment of the cheque amount,<\/p>\n
the defendant has deliberately evaded the payment stating one<\/p>\n
reason or the other. The plaintiff has the right to claim interest<\/p>\n
at the rate of 18% per annum on the cheque amount of<\/p>\n
Rs.24,655.65. Hence the suit.\n<\/p>\n
      3. The suit was resisted by the defendant contending inter<\/p>\n
alia as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
      The suit is not maintainable. This defendant is not bound to<\/p>\n
pay the amount mentioned in the plaint. This defendant does not<\/p>\n
owe the sum of Rs.24,655.65 as stated in paragraph 3 of the<\/p>\n
plaint. It is true that this defendant has been buying on credit<\/p>\n
articles from the plaintiff’s shop. Ext.A1 was only a signed blank<\/p>\n
cheque given by this defendant by way of security for the amount<\/p>\n
due from him. The actual amount due from this defendant to the<\/p>\n
plaintiff was Rs.23,455.65. In December, 1992, this defendant<\/p>\n
had paid a sum of Rs.14,996.70 as cash to the plaintiff.          As<\/p>\n
against the balance amount of Rs.8458.95, a sum of Rs.1500\/-<\/p>\n
was    paid  on   08.02.1993      through    this   defendant’s son<\/p>\n
Shihabudheen (DW2) and on receipt of the same, the plaintiff<\/p>\n
had sent Ext.B1 chit dated 08.02.1993 acknowledging receipt of<\/p>\n
Rs.1500\/- towards Rs.8,458.95 and stating that the balance<\/p>\n
amount due was Rs.6,958.95. Thereafter on 16.03.1993, this<\/p>\n
defendant had sent Rs.1000\/- through his son leaving a balance<\/p>\n
of Rs.5958.95. Subsequently, on 17.04.1993, this defendant had<\/p>\n
sent another sum of Rs.1000\/- through one Valappil Mohammed<\/p>\n
Kaderkunju and the balance amount due from this defendant is<\/p>\n
Rs.4,958.95 which this defendant is willing to pay to the plaintiff<\/p>\n
on demand.     Except for the said amount of Rs.4,958.95, this<\/p>\n
defendant is not liable to pay any other amounts to the plaintiff.<\/p>\n
The suit may, therefore, be dismissed. Since the plaintiff has no<\/p>\n
cause of action, the plaintiff is also not entitled to any amount by<\/p>\n
way of interest.\n<\/p>\n
      4. On the side of the plaintiff, Exts.A1 to A4 were marked.<\/p>\n
It is not known as to how these documents were marked without<\/p>\n
proof since neither the plaintiff nor anybody on his behalf<\/p>\n
mounted the witness box. On the side of the defendants, the<\/p>\n
defendant and his son Shihabudheen were examined as DWs 1<\/p>\n
and 2 and Ext.B1 chit dated 08.02.1993 was marked.<\/p>\n
      5. The defendant examined as DW1 spoke in terms of the<\/p>\n
averments in the written statement. His son examined as DW2<\/p>\n
gave evidence to the effect that on 08.02.1993, the defendant<\/p>\n
had entrusted a sum of Rs.1500\/- with him to pay the plaintiff<\/p>\n
and he had paid the same to the plaintiff who had issued Ext.B1<\/p>\n
chit acknowledging receipt of the said amount and indicating the<\/p>\n
balance amount of Rs.6,958.95.\n<\/p>\n
      6. The court below proceeded on the footing that since the<\/p>\n
defendant had pleaded a discharge, the entire burden was on the<\/p>\n
defendant and holding that the defendant failed to prove the<\/p>\n
discharge set up by him for the cheque amount of Rs.24,655.65,<\/p>\n
the court below passed a decree for Rs.30,576\/- with interest at<\/p>\n
the rate of 18% per annum from the date of suit till realisation.<\/p>\n
It is the said decree which is assailed in this appeal by the<\/p>\n
defendant.\n<\/p>\n
     7. I heard the learned counsel appearing on either side.<\/p>\n
     8. The learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff made the<\/p>\n
following submissions before me in support of the decree:-<\/p>\n
     The defendant has admittedly been purchasing grocery<\/p>\n
items from the plaintiff’s shop on credit. He was setting up a<\/p>\n
plea of discharge. So, the entire burden was on the defendant to<\/p>\n
prove the discharge.      The defendant had miserably failed to<\/p>\n
prove the discharge. The court below was right in holding that<\/p>\n
Ext.B1 chit has not been shown to have been issued in respect of<\/p>\n
the transaction in question. Hence, the decree passed by the<\/p>\n
court below does not call for any interference.<\/p>\n
     9.     I am afraid that I cannot agree with the above<\/p>\n
submissions. The specific stand taken by the defendant in his<\/p>\n
written statement is that Ext.A1 cheque was issued by way of<\/p>\n
security for the grocery items purchased by him on credit from<\/p>\n
the plaintiff’s shop on various occasions. This is not a case where<\/p>\n
the defendant has admitted the suit claim of Rs. 24,655.65 and<\/p>\n
has pleaded a discharge. The specific case of the defendant is<\/p>\n
that the amount which he owed towards the plaintiff was only<\/p>\n
Rs.23,455.65. He was pleading a partial discharge of the said<\/p>\n
amount and not the suit amount. The defendant examined as<\/p>\n
PW1 spoke in terms of the written statement and stated that<\/p>\n
Ext.B1 was a chit issued by the plaintiff to the defendant’s son<\/p>\n
(DW2) on paying a sum of Rs.1500\/- to the plaintiff.            The<\/p>\n
defendant’s son examined as DW2 also corroborated the said<\/p>\n
version of PW1. There was not even a suggestion put to DWs 1<\/p>\n
and 2 that Ext.B1 chit was not issued by the plaintiff or that it<\/p>\n
was issued as against some other transaction.            The most<\/p>\n
competent person who could have confirmed or denied Ext.B1<\/p>\n
was the plaintiff himself. For reasons best known to the plaintiff,<\/p>\n
he did not mount the witness box. If so, the court below was not<\/p>\n
justified in holding that the defendant has failed to prove the case<\/p>\n
set up by him. Going by the defence case as substantiated by<\/p>\n
DWs 1 and 2, the balance amount that was due to the plaintiff<\/p>\n
was only the sum of Rs. 4958.95 after giving credit to the<\/p>\n
payment of Rs.1500\/- on 08.02.1993, Rs.1000\/- on 16.03.1993<\/p>\n
and another sum of Rs.1000\/- on 17.04.1993. In all fairness, the<\/p>\n
defendant had admitted that he was willing to pay the balance<\/p>\n
amount of Rs.4958.95. In the facts and circumstances of the<\/p>\n
case, the plaintiff would be entitled only to the said amount since<\/p>\n
the plaintiff has failed to substantiate the suit claim. Neither the<\/p>\n
plaintiff nor the court below was entitled to put the blame on the<\/p>\n
defendant for failure to prove the alleged discharge set up by the<\/p>\n
defendant with regard to the suit claim.           Accordingly, the<\/p>\n
judgment and decree passed by the court below are set aside and<\/p>\n
the suit will stand decreed for a sum of Rs.4958.95 which amount<\/p>\n
shall carry interest at the rate of 18% per annum on the principal<\/p>\n
amount till the date of suit and at the rate of 6% per annum from<\/p>\n
the date of suit till realisation failing which the plaintiff will be<\/p>\n
entitled to realise the same from the defendant and his assets.<\/p>\n
      This appeal is disposed of as above.\n<\/p>\n
      Dated this the 18th day of June, 2009.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                         V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
rv<\/p>\n
       V. RAMKUMAR, J<\/p>\n
————————————\n<\/p>\n
 A.S. No. 509 of 1997<\/p>\n
—————————————-<\/p>\n
18th day of June, 2009.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      JUDGMENT<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court P.M.Mohammed vs M\/S.Rageena Stores on 18 June, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM AS.No. 509 of 1997(E) 1. P.M.MOHAMMED … Petitioner Vs 1. M\/S.RAGEENA STORES, PERUMBAVOOR … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ For Respondent :SRI.K.S.BABU The Hon’ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR Dated :18\/06\/2009 O R D E R V. RAMKUMAR […]<\/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-166439","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nP.M.Mohammed vs M\/S.Rageena Stores on 18 June, 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\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"P.M.Mohammed vs M\/S.Rageena Stores on 18 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-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=\"2009-06-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-02-03T19:33:31+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"P.M.Mohammed vs M\\\/S.Rageena Stores on 18 June, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-03T19:33:31+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1338,\"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\\\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009\",\"name\":\"P.M.Mohammed vs M\\\/S.Rageena Stores on 18 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-03T19:33:31+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"P.M.Mohammed vs M\\\/S.Rageena Stores on 18 June, 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":"P.M.Mohammed vs M\/S.Rageena Stores on 18 June, 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\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"P.M.Mohammed vs M\/S.Rageena Stores on 18 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-06-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-02-03T19:33:31+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"P.M.Mohammed vs M\/S.Rageena Stores on 18 June, 2009","datePublished":"2009-06-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-03T19:33:31+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009"},"wordCount":1338,"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\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009","name":"P.M.Mohammed vs M\/S.Rageena Stores on 18 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-06-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-03T19:33:31+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-m-mohammed-vs-ms-rageena-stores-on-18-june-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"P.M.Mohammed vs M\/S.Rageena Stores on 18 June, 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\/166439","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=166439"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/166439\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=166439"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=166439"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=166439"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}