{"id":173700,"date":"2006-04-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-04-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006"},"modified":"2016-10-22T07:21:12","modified_gmt":"2016-10-22T01:51:12","slug":"vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006","title":{"rendered":"Vellaiammal vs S. Vijayakumar on 6 April, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Vellaiammal vs S. Vijayakumar on 6 April, 2006<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\n\nDATED : 06\/04\/2006\n\n\nCORAM:\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.C.ARUMUGAPERUMAL  ADITYAN\n\n\nC.M.A.(MD)No.1063 of 1997\n\n\n1. Vellaiammal\n2. Minor Ranjini\n3. Karuppiah\n4. Sakunthala\n5. Minor Arumugam\n6. Minor Saroja\n7. Minor Selvam\t\t\t\t\t\n(2nd appellant through mother and\nguardian Vellaiammal I appellant herein)\nMinors 5 to 7 through father and\nguardian Karuppiah, third appellant\nherein.\t\t\t\t\t...\tAppellants\n\n\nVs\n\n\n1. S. Vijayakumar\n2. Branch Manager\n   New India Assurance Company Limited\n   Seethaiammal Buidling\n   5719\/2, Sathiamoorthy Road\n   Pudukkottai.\n3. A.Jayalakshmi\t\t\t... \tRespondents\n\n\nPrayer\n\n\nAppeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,  against\nthe judgment and decree dated 31.12.1996 made in MCOP No. 302\/1994  on the file\nof the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal( Additional District Judge cum chief\nJudicial Magistrate), Pudukkottai.\n\n\n!For Appellants   \t....\tMr. Govindaraj\n\t\t\t\n\n^For Respondents \t....\tR1 to R3 served but\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\tno appearance\t\t\t\n\n\n:JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t This appeal has been preferred against the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.302<br \/>\nof 1994 on the file of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal( Additional District<br \/>\nJudge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate) Pudukkottai. The petitioners in<br \/>\nM.C.O.P.No.302 of 1994 are the appellants herein.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. The short facts of the case for the purpose of deciding the appeal are<br \/>\nas follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>On 3.5.1994 at 8.45 a.m., the claimant&#8217;s husband who was working as Security in<br \/>\nthe Arantangi Chemicals Company was proceeding in his Hero cycle on the left<br \/>\nside of the road, the vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-55-8127 was belonging<br \/>\nto the third respondent, which was insured with the second respondent was driven<br \/>\nby its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the first claimant&#8217;s<br \/>\nhusband causing grievous injuries all over the body and he was taken to the<br \/>\nGovernment Hospital,Arantangi, where he died, ithout responding to treatment on<br \/>\n6.5.1994.  The claimants are  the widow, minor daughter,parents of the deceased,<br \/>\nminor brothers and sister of the deceased. The claimants have  filed a claim<br \/>\npetition claiming Rs.8,00,000\/- towards compensation.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. The first respondent remained exparte.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. The second respondent in his counter has contended that the claimants<br \/>\nhave to prove that they are the dependants of the deceased and the claimants 5<br \/>\nto 7 are not entitled to claim any compensation, since they are not the<br \/>\ndependants of the deceased. Only due to the negligent act of the deceased, the<br \/>\naccident had occurred.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. Before the Tribunal, P.W1 and P.W.2  were examined  and  Exs P1 to P6<br \/>\nwere marked on the side of the claimants.   Neither oral nor documentary<br \/>\nevidence was let in by the respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. After going through the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has<br \/>\ncome to a conclusion that only due to the rash and negligent driving of the<br \/>\ndriver of the lorry bearing Registration No.TN-55-8127  has awarded a sum of<br \/>\nRs.76,800\/- towards compensation. Not satisfied with the award of compensation,<br \/>\nthe claimants have preferred this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7.  Now the point for determination in this appeal is whether the award<br \/>\npassed in M.C.O.P.No.302 of 1994 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims<br \/>\nTribunal(Additional District Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate)Pudukottai is<br \/>\nliable to be enhanced for the reasons stated in the memorandum of appeal in<br \/>\nC.M.A.No.1063 of 1997?\n<\/p>\n<p>8. The Point:\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe learned counsel for the appellants would contend that the learned<br \/>\nTribunal, while assessing the loss of income had adopted the multiplier 16<br \/>\ninstead of 17 as per Schedule 2 to Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, since<br \/>\nthe age of the deceased was 32 as per Ex.P3 postmortem certificate.  The monthly<br \/>\nincome of the deceased was fixed  by the learned Tribunal as Rs.600\/-, since<br \/>\nthere was no documentary evidence except Ex P5 was produced to show the income<br \/>\nof the deceased as Rs.600\/- per mensum by doing Security service at<br \/>\nPudukottai,after deducting 1\/3 towards his personal expenses, the learned<br \/>\nTribunal has taken the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.400\/- and assessed<br \/>\nthe annual income of the deceased as Rs.4,800\/- and adopting the multiplier 16<br \/>\ninstead of 17.  After the correct multiplier of 17 is adopted, then the loss of<br \/>\nincome of the deceased will come to Rs.81,600\/-(400 x 12 x 17 =Rs.81.600\/-).<br \/>\nThe learned counsel for the appellants would contend that towards loss of<br \/>\nconsortium and loss of love and affection, the Tribunal has not awarded any<br \/>\ncompensation, whereas it is in evidence that the wife of the deceased has become<br \/>\nwidow at the young age of 22 and the second claimant is the minor daughter aged<br \/>\n2 years at the time of accident and the parents of the deceased are aged about<br \/>\n50 and 47 respectively.  The other respondents are the brothers and sister of<br \/>\nthe deceased. Hence, I award a sum of Rs.15,000\/- towards loss of consortium to<br \/>\nthe first claimant and I award a sum of Rs.5,000\/- towards loss of love and<br \/>\naffection to the other claimants. The learned Tribunal has not awarded any<br \/>\ncompensation under the head &#8220;damages to cloth and articles&#8221;.  It is in evidence<br \/>\nthat the deceased was pedalling  his cycle at the time of accident. So due to<br \/>\nthe accident his cycle would have got damaged. So under the head damages to the<br \/>\ncloth and articles, I award a sum of Rs.2,500\/-. Soon after the  accident, the<br \/>\ninjured was taken to Government Hospital and he died three days  after the<br \/>\nadmission ie., on 6.5.1994. So if the injured would have been taken in a private<br \/>\ntaxi to the hospital and then corpus of the deceased was taken to his house in<br \/>\nthe ambulance, certainly, the claimants would have incurred an expenses of not<br \/>\nless than Rs.2,000\/-. Hence, I award a sum of Rs.2,000\/- towards transport to<br \/>\nhospital and back.  The learned Tribunal has not even awarded any  compensation<br \/>\nunder the head funeral expenses. As per Schedule 2 to Section 163 A of the Motor<br \/>\nVehicles Act, the claimants are entitled to Rs.2,000\/- towards funeral expenses<br \/>\nunder General damages. Hence,I award a sum of Rs.2,000\/- towards funeral<br \/>\nexpenses. According to the claimants, the accident had occurred at 8.45 a.m on<br \/>\n3.5.1994 and the injured Karuppaiah died in the hospital on 6.5.1994 without<br \/>\nresponding the treatment. So during the period of treatment, the deceased would<br \/>\nhave experienced enormous pain and suffering as per the dictum reported in<br \/>\nThilammai and others-v-A.V.Mallayya Pillai(1979 T.L.N.J.461)<br \/>\nwherein it has been held by the learned Judge as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8221; It is true there is a distinction between case of death resulting from the<br \/>\naccident and a case of other personal injuries not causing the death of the<br \/>\nparty, but the party dying subsequently during the pendency of the proceedings<br \/>\nnot due to the accident, distinction so far as the right to claim damages.  The<br \/>\nclaims in all these cases are now statutory rights.  Therefore, there appears to<br \/>\nbe no reason to restrict the right to the injured alone.  Any way that point<br \/>\nneed not be decided in this case at this stage. C.P.Kandaswamy Vs. Mariappa<br \/>\nStores                                                        (A.I.R.1974<br \/>\nMad.178) is distinguishable.  In that case, the claim was for a sum of<br \/>\nRs.25,000\/-.  This was made up of Rs.1,000\/- towards medical expenses,<br \/>\nRs.4,000\/- towards   loss of professional income, Rs.10,000\/- for shock, pain<br \/>\nand suffering and another sum of Rs.10,000\/- for the permanent partial<br \/>\ndisability suffered by him on account of the accident. Rs.5,000\/- which was<br \/>\ngranted by the Tribunal made up of Rs.2,000\/- towards loss of professional<br \/>\nincome, Rs.2,000\/- towards shock , pain and suffering as a result of the<br \/>\ninjuries sustained by him and Rs. 1,000\/- for medical expenses and the rest of<br \/>\nthe claim was disallowed. It is against that order an appeal was pending.  With<br \/>\nreference to shock, pain and suffering and loss of professional income, it was<br \/>\nheld that the cause of action did not survive&#8230;..\n<\/p>\n<p> But in this case even that difficulty does not arise as the claim for damages<br \/>\nincluded the value of the cycle which is damages to property.  Certainly that<br \/>\nclaim relating to value cycle surviving for the legal representatives is a<br \/>\ndamage done by any person to the estate of the deceased. Even on the  question<br \/>\nof recovering the actual expenses incurred by the deceased, I have no doubt that<br \/>\nthe claim will survive since that amount if had not been spent might have been<br \/>\navailable as the estate of the deceased to be succeeded by his legal<br \/>\nrepresentatives.  The actual dispute will be only with reference to the pain and<br \/>\nsuffering and on the permanent disability and loss of earning claimed in the<br \/>\npetition. With reference to these items, though I have my own doubts, as I have<br \/>\nalready stated, I am bound by the decision of the Bench reported in<br \/>\nC.P.Kandaswamy Vs.Mariappa Stores(A.I.R.1974 Mad.178) and I do not consider it<br \/>\nnecessary to refer to a Bench for further consideration. Suffice it to say that<br \/>\nthe petitioners should have been brought on record since other claims which<br \/>\ncould survive to the petitioners are also made.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>The claimants are entitled to compensation under the head pain and suffering<br \/>\nalso. So under the head pain and suffering, I award a sum of Rs.10,000\/-.  Hence<br \/>\nI award a sum of Rs.1,18,100\/- towards compensation.  Hence I hold on the point<br \/>\nthat the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.302 of 1994  is liable to be enhanced for<br \/>\nthe reasons stated in the memorandum of appeal in C.M.A.No.1063 of 1997. The<br \/>\npoint is answered accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9. In the result, this appeal is allowed and the award passed in<br \/>\nM.C.O.P.No.302 of 1994 is enhanced and fixed as Rs.1,81,100\/-(Rs.81,600 +<br \/>\nRs.15,000 + Rs 5,000 + Rs.2,500 + Rs.2,000 + Rs.2,000 + 10,000\/- = Rs.1,18,100\/-<br \/>\n) (Rupees One lakh, eighteen thousand and one hundred) Only.  The claimants are<br \/>\nentitled to  9% interest for the enhanced award amount. Out of the award amount,<br \/>\nfirst claimant is entitled to Rs.50,000\/- , the minor second claimant is<br \/>\nentitled to Rs.43,100\/- and claimants 3 and 4 are entitled to each Rs.12,500\/-.<br \/>\nThe first claimant is permitted to withdraw a sum of Rs.25,000\/- at the first<br \/>\ninstance and the claimants 3 and 4 are each permitted to withdraw Rs.10,000\/- at<br \/>\nthe first instance.  The minor second claimant&#8217;s share with accrued interest is<br \/>\nto be deposited in any one of the Nationalised Bank till she attains majority.<br \/>\nThe balance of the award amount with accrued interest in respect of the shares<br \/>\nof claimants 1,3 and 4 are to be deposited in any one of the Nationalised Bank<br \/>\nfor a period of three years.  During such period, claimants 1,3 and 4 are<br \/>\nentitled to withdraw, the accrued interest once in three months from the Fixed<br \/>\nDeposit in respect of the share of the minor, the guardian-first claimant is<br \/>\npermitted to withdraw the accrued interest once in three months for the welfare<br \/>\nof the minor. In other aspects, the award of the Tribunal is confirmed. The<br \/>\nenhanced award amount is to be deposited in two months. No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>sg<\/p>\n<p>To<br \/>\nThe Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal<br \/>\n(Additional District Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate)<br \/>\nPudukottai.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Vellaiammal vs S. Vijayakumar on 6 April, 2006 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 06\/04\/2006 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.C.ARUMUGAPERUMAL ADITYAN C.M.A.(MD)No.1063 of 1997 1. Vellaiammal 2. Minor Ranjini 3. Karuppiah 4. Sakunthala 5. Minor Arumugam 6. Minor Saroja 7. Minor Selvam (2nd appellant through mother and guardian [&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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-173700","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Vellaiammal vs S. Vijayakumar on 6 April, 2006 - 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\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Vellaiammal vs S. Vijayakumar on 6 April, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006\" \/>\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=\"2006-04-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-10-22T01:51:12+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\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Vellaiammal vs S. Vijayakumar on 6 April, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-04-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-22T01:51:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006\"},\"wordCount\":1705,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006\",\"name\":\"Vellaiammal vs S. Vijayakumar on 6 April, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-04-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-22T01:51:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Vellaiammal vs S. Vijayakumar on 6 April, 2006\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Vellaiammal vs S. Vijayakumar on 6 April, 2006 - 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\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Vellaiammal vs S. Vijayakumar on 6 April, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-04-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-10-22T01:51:12+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\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Vellaiammal vs S. Vijayakumar on 6 April, 2006","datePublished":"2006-04-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-22T01:51:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006"},"wordCount":1705,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006","name":"Vellaiammal vs S. Vijayakumar on 6 April, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-04-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-22T01:51:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vellaiammal-vs-s-vijayakumar-on-6-april-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Vellaiammal vs S. Vijayakumar on 6 April, 2006"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/173700","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=173700"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/173700\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=173700"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=173700"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=173700"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}