{"id":168136,"date":"1995-07-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1995-07-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995"},"modified":"2017-05-16T03:50:17","modified_gmt":"2017-05-15T22:20:17","slug":"n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995","title":{"rendered":"N.P. Thirugnanam (D) By Lrs vs Dr. R. Jagan Mohan Rao &amp; Ors on 12 July, 1995"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">N.P. Thirugnanam (D) By Lrs vs Dr. R. Jagan Mohan Rao &amp; Ors on 12 July, 1995<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1996 AIR  116, \t\t  1995 SCC  (5) 115<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: K Ramaswamy<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Ramaswamy, K.<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nN.P. THIRUGNANAM (D) BY LRS\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nDR. R. JAGAN MOHAN RAO &amp; ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT12\/07\/1995\n\nBENCH:\nRAMASWAMY, K.\nBENCH:\nRAMASWAMY, K.\nHANSARIA B.L. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1996 AIR  116\t\t  1995 SCC  (5) 115\n JT 1995 (5)   553\t  1995 SCALE  (4)465\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t\t\t       ORDER<br \/>\n     Petitioners are  the legal\t representatives  of  N.  P.<br \/>\nThirugnanam, the plaintiff who had entered into an agreement<br \/>\nof sale\t with the first respondent for himself and on behalf<br \/>\nof his\tmother, brothers  and sisters  as General  Power  of<br \/>\nAttorney holder\t to alienate  the house\t property in  Madras<br \/>\ncity for  a total consideration of Rs. 2,30,000\/- and paid a<br \/>\nsum of\tRs. 10,000\/-  as advance.  Till date of execution of<br \/>\nthe sale-deed,\the came into possession as a tenant agreeing<br \/>\nto pay\ta sum  of Rs. 1,650\/- per month as rent. He laid the<br \/>\nsuit for  specific performance\twith the  averments that the<br \/>\nrespondents have  evaded  to  execute  the  sale  deed.\t The<br \/>\nrespondents pleaded  that they\twere ready  and\t willing  to<br \/>\nperform their  part of\tthe contract  and the piaintiffs did<br \/>\nnot even  pay Rs. 20,000\/- further advance as contracted  by<br \/>\nDecember,   1979 to  discharge the mortgage debt due  to the<br \/>\nMadras\t Corporation.\tThe   amount   of   Rs. 20,000\/- was<br \/>\nadjusted towards the rent payable with consent. On adduction<br \/>\nof evidence   and  consideration  thereof,  the single judge<br \/>\nof the\tHigh Court  found that\tthe plaintiff  was not ready<br \/>\nand willing   to  perform   his part  of the contract giving<br \/>\ndiverse\t  reasons. On\tappeal\tin   OSA  No.  195\/83  dated<br \/>\nJanuary 3,  1985 the  Division Bench  in a  well  considered<br \/>\njudgment dismissed the same.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The first\tground raised  in the SLP is that the decree<br \/>\nof dismissal  against the  dead\t plaintiff  appellant  is  a<br \/>\nnullity. We find no force in the contention. It is true that<br \/>\nthe plaintiff  died on\tDecember 26,  1994 by which date the<br \/>\narguments in  the appeal were already heard and the judgment<br \/>\nwas  reserved.\t The  counsel  for  the\t plaintiff  filed  a<br \/>\nMemorandum bringing  to the  notice of\tthe court the demise<br \/>\nunder Order 22 Rule 11-A of CPC and prayed for time to bring<br \/>\non  record  the\t petitioners  as  legal\t representatives  to<br \/>\nrepresent the  estate of the deceased. The court declined to<br \/>\naccede to the request.\n<\/p>\n<p>    Rule 6 of Order 22 provides that:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t   &#8220;No abatement  by reason  of death<br \/>\n     after hearing:-&#8220;Notwithstanding anything<br \/>\n     contained in the foregoing rules,whether<br \/>\n     the   cause of  action survives  or not,<br \/>\n     there shall beno abatement\t by reason of<br \/>\n     the death\tof either  party between  the<br \/>\n     conclusion\t  of the   hearing  and\t  the<br \/>\n     pronouncing     of\t the  judgement,  but<br \/>\n     judgement\tmay    in  such\t   case\t   be<br \/>\n     pronounced notwithstanding\t the\tdeath<br \/>\n     and shall have the same force and effect<br \/>\n     as\t  if it\t  had been  pronounced before<br \/>\n     the death took place.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>In the\tface of the explicit language in Rule 6 of Order 22,<br \/>\nthere can  be no  abatement by\treason of  the death  of any<br \/>\nparty  between\t the  conclusion  of  the  hearing  and\t the<br \/>\npronouncement  of  the\tjudgement.  It\tmay  be\t pronounced,<br \/>\nnotwithstanding the death, and shall have the same force and<br \/>\neffect as  if judgment\thad been pronounced before the death<br \/>\ntook place. Therefore, the contention that the judgement and<br \/>\ndecree of  the appellate  court is  a nullity  is devoid  of<br \/>\nsubstance.\n<\/p>\n<p>     It is  next contended  that the  plaintiff\t was  always<br \/>\nready and  willing to  perform his  part of the contract. To<br \/>\nbuttress it,  counsel placed strong reliance on the evidence<br \/>\nof PW-2,  who had testified that he was willing and prepared<br \/>\nto lend a sum of Rs. 2,00,000\/- to the plaintiff on the foot<br \/>\nof a  promissory note. It is not necessary for the plaintiff<br \/>\nthat he\t should keep  ready  the  money\t on  hand.  What  is<br \/>\nrelevant and  material is  that he should have the necessary<br \/>\ncapacity to  raise the\tfunds and  was ready  and willing to<br \/>\nperform\t his\t part\tof  the\t  contract  which  has\tbeen<br \/>\ndemonstrated by\t the evidence  of PW-2.\t We do not accede to<br \/>\nthe contention.\t The trial  judge had pointed out that on an<br \/>\napplication filed  by the  defendants, a direction was given<br \/>\nto the plaintiff by order dated February 11, 1991 to deposit<br \/>\nthe amount  of Rs.  2,00,000\/-\tor  furnish  bank  guarantee<br \/>\ngiving time  up to  March 11, 1991. He neither deposited the<br \/>\namount nor  has given bank guarantee. It was also found that<br \/>\nthe plaintiff  was dabbling  in real estate business. He had<br \/>\nhouse on  hire purchase\t agreement  with  the  T.N.  Housing<br \/>\nBoard. He  paid only  Rs. 7,750\/-  upto 1980.  A sum  of Rs.<br \/>\n29,665\/- was  further payable.\tHe had an agreement with one<br \/>\nAnnamma Philip for Rs. 49,500\/- to sell the said house after<br \/>\npurchase from  the Board. Obviously, he had obtained advance<br \/>\nand sold  the house  to his vendee on February 7, 1980 after<br \/>\ngetting a  sale deed executed in his favour. He entered into<br \/>\nan agreement  (Ex.p.1) on  9.4.79 to purchase the suit house<br \/>\nfor Rs.\t 2,30,000\/-. He was not able to pay the loans and he<br \/>\nadjusted Rs. 20,000\/- which was paid towards arrears of rent<br \/>\nand  paid  only\t Rs.  1975\/-  under  Ex.P.30  for  the\tsale<br \/>\nconsideration of his house. He was unable to pay the rent to<br \/>\nthe  respondents  and  had  deposited  huge  amount  towards<br \/>\narrears of  rent pursuant to the orders of the courts. PW-2,<br \/>\nthough professed  to be\t willing to   advance a\t sum of\t Rs.<br \/>\n2,00,000\/-,   did not  have  cash  and admitted that  had to<br \/>\nobtain Rs.  2,00,000\/- by hypothicating his property  and at<br \/>\nthe same  time was  willing to\tlend on\t a pronote  to\t the<br \/>\nplaintiff a  sum of  Rs. 2,00,000\/-,  which  was  hard\t  to<br \/>\nbelieve.     These    circumstances    were    taken\tinto<br \/>\nconsideration by  the trial  Judge as  well as\tthe Division<br \/>\nBench in  concluding that  the plaintiff  was not  ready and<br \/>\nwilling to perform his part of the contract.\n<\/p>\n<p>     It is  settled law that remedy for specific performance<br \/>\nis an  equitable remedy\t and is\t in the\t discretion  of\t the<br \/>\ncourt, which  discretion requires  to be exercised according<br \/>\nto  settled   principles  of  law  and\tnot  arbitrarily  as<br \/>\nadumbrated under  s.20 of  the Specific Relief Act 1963 (for<br \/>\nshort, &#8216;the  Act&#8217;). Under  s.20, the  court is\tnot bound to<br \/>\ngrant the  relief just\tbecause there was valid agreement of<br \/>\nsale. Section 16(c) of the Act envisages that plaintiff must<br \/>\nplead and  prove that  he had  performed or  has always been<br \/>\nready and  willing to  perform the  essential terms  of\t the<br \/>\ncontract which\tare to be performed by him, other than those<br \/>\nterms the  performance of which has been prevented or waived<br \/>\nby the\tdefendant. The\tcontinuous readiness and willingness<br \/>\non the\tpart of\t the plaintiff\tis a  condition precedent to<br \/>\ngrant the relief of specific performance. This\tcircumstance<br \/>\nis  material  and  relevant  and  is  required\t  to  be  be<br \/>\nconsidered by the court while granting or refusing  to grant<br \/>\nthe relief.  If the plaintiff fails to either aver  or prove<br \/>\nthe same,  he must  fail. To  adjudge whether the  plaintiff<br \/>\nis   ready and\twilling to perform his part of the contract,<br \/>\nthe court  must take  into consideration the conduct  of the<br \/>\nplaintiff prior\t  and subsequent  to the filing of  the suit<br \/>\nalongwith other\t attending circumstances.  The\tamount\t  of<br \/>\nconsideration  which he\t has to\t pay  to  the defendant must<br \/>\nof necessity be proved to be available. Right from the\tdate<br \/>\nof   the execution   till  date of  the decree he must prove<br \/>\nthat he\t is ready and has always been willing to perform his<br \/>\npart of\t   the\tcontract.  As  stated,\tthe  factum  of\t his<br \/>\nreadiness   and willingness   to  perform   his part  of the<br \/>\ncontract is  to be adjudged with reference to the conduct of<br \/>\nthe party  and the  attending circumstances.  The court\t may<br \/>\ninfer from the facts and circumstances whether the plaintiff<br \/>\nwas ready  and was  always ready  and willing to perform his<br \/>\npart of contract.\n<\/p>\n<p>     In view  of the  aforesaid factual\t findings and of the<br \/>\nlegal position, the High Court has rightly concluded thus:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t   We have no hesitation in recording<br \/>\n     the agreement  with  the finding  of the<br \/>\n     learned single Judge that\tthe plaintiff<br \/>\n     has hopelessly  failed and\t shown rather<br \/>\n     reluctance\t  than readiness  to  perform<br \/>\n     his part  of the contract. In  the facts<br \/>\n     that are noticed in the judgement of the<br \/>\n     trial   court, which   are extracted  by<br \/>\n     us\t    as\tabove,\t the  only   possible<br \/>\n     conclusion\t is    that  the    plaintiff<br \/>\n     really  had   rather  reluctant\t than<br \/>\n     willing  to perform  his part  of the<br \/>\n       contract\t and   was at  no time\tready<br \/>\n     with   either   money   or resources  to<br \/>\n     fulfill his  part of  the contract.  The<br \/>\n     other circumstances  which\t  are noticed<br \/>\n     by\t the  learned  single  Jude  and  are<br \/>\n     detailed by  him in  the judgement go to<br \/>\n     show that\tthe very  idea\t of  entering<br \/>\n     into an   agreement   with\t  the\tfirst<br \/>\n     defendant alone   when  the    plaintiff<br \/>\n     appellant\t was   already informed about<br \/>\n     the death\t of  Dr.  R.  Surya  Rao  and<br \/>\n     the devolution  of\t  his interest\t upon<br \/>\n     the   first defendant,   his mother, his<br \/>\n     brothers and    his  sisters,    was  to<br \/>\n     somehow\t or  other   enter  upon  the<br \/>\n     property, but,  the stipulated rent also<br \/>\n     was not   paid  by\t the plaintiff to the<br \/>\n     defendants. The  trial court  has\tnoted<br \/>\n     that   there was  no legal necessity for<br \/>\n     the defendants  to\t  part with  the suit<br \/>\n     property and  held against the plaintiff<br \/>\n     that   the\t     very   contract\t  was<br \/>\n     speculative  in nature and\t entered into<br \/>\n     by\t  the\tplaintiff   who\t  has\t been<br \/>\n     dabbling in   real\t estate\t transactions<br \/>\n     without\t the  means   to  purchase  a<br \/>\n     substantial  immovable  property\t like<br \/>\n     the  suit property and we agree with the<br \/>\n     same.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>     This finding  is well  supported  from  the  facts\t and<br \/>\ncircumstances and  being  a  finding  of  fact,\t we  see no<br \/>\ninfirmity in  the judgement  warranting granting  of  leave.<br \/>\nAccordingly, the special leave petition is dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India N.P. Thirugnanam (D) By Lrs vs Dr. R. Jagan Mohan Rao &amp; Ors on 12 July, 1995 Equivalent citations: 1996 AIR 116, 1995 SCC (5) 115 Author: K Ramaswamy Bench: Ramaswamy, K. PETITIONER: N.P. THIRUGNANAM (D) BY LRS Vs. RESPONDENT: DR. R. JAGAN MOHAN RAO &amp; ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT12\/07\/1995 BENCH: [&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-168136","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>N.P. Thirugnanam (D) By Lrs vs Dr. R. Jagan Mohan Rao &amp; Ors on 12 July, 1995 - 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\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"N.P. Thirugnanam (D) By Lrs vs Dr. R. Jagan Mohan Rao &amp; Ors on 12 July, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995\" \/>\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=\"1995-07-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-05-15T22:20:17+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\\\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"N.P. Thirugnanam (D) By Lrs vs Dr. R. Jagan Mohan Rao &amp; Ors on 12 July, 1995\",\"datePublished\":\"1995-07-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-15T22:20:17+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995\"},\"wordCount\":1582,\"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\\\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995\",\"name\":\"N.P. Thirugnanam (D) By Lrs vs Dr. R. Jagan Mohan Rao &amp; Ors on 12 July, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1995-07-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-15T22:20:17+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"N.P. Thirugnanam (D) By Lrs vs Dr. R. Jagan Mohan Rao &amp; Ors on 12 July, 1995\"}]},{\"@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":"N.P. Thirugnanam (D) By Lrs vs Dr. R. Jagan Mohan Rao &amp; Ors on 12 July, 1995 - 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\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"N.P. Thirugnanam (D) By Lrs vs Dr. R. Jagan Mohan Rao &amp; Ors on 12 July, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1995-07-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-05-15T22:20:17+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\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"N.P. Thirugnanam (D) By Lrs vs Dr. R. Jagan Mohan Rao &amp; Ors on 12 July, 1995","datePublished":"1995-07-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-15T22:20:17+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995"},"wordCount":1582,"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\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995","name":"N.P. Thirugnanam (D) By Lrs vs Dr. R. Jagan Mohan Rao &amp; Ors on 12 July, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1995-07-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-15T22:20:17+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-p-thirugnanam-d-by-lrs-vs-dr-r-jagan-mohan-rao-ors-on-12-july-1995#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"N.P. Thirugnanam (D) By Lrs vs Dr. R. Jagan Mohan Rao &amp; Ors on 12 July, 1995"}]},{"@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\/168136","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=168136"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/168136\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=168136"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=168136"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=168136"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}