{"id":175729,"date":"2007-02-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-02-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007"},"modified":"2015-02-02T05:52:12","modified_gmt":"2015-02-02T00:22:12","slug":"john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007","title":{"rendered":"John Simon vs T.H. Mohammed Kunju on 9 February, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">John Simon vs T.H. Mohammed Kunju on 9 February, 2007<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nFAO No. 65 of 2006()\n\n\n1. JOHN SIMON,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. T.H. MOHAMMED KUNJU,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.HARIDAS\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN\n\n Dated :09\/02\/2007\n\n O R D E R\n            KURIAN JOSEPH &amp; K.T. SANKARAN, JJ.\n\n           ------------------------------------\n\n                   F.A.O. NO.  65 OF 2006\n\n           ------------------------------------\n\n        Dated this the 9th day of February,2007\n\n\n\n                           JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>Sankaran, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The appellant was set exparte in the suit filed by<\/p>\n<p>the   respondent  for  realisation  of  money  and  an  exparte<\/p>\n<p>decree   was   passed   on   10.6.2004.     On   8.7.2004,   the<\/p>\n<p>appellant filed an application to set aside the exparte<\/p>\n<p>decree.     But   the   application   was   filed   under   Order   IX<\/p>\n<p>Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure instead of Order<\/p>\n<p>IX Rule 13.   The court below dismissed the application<\/p>\n<p>mainly   on   two   grounds:     (1)   Though   the   application   is<\/p>\n<p>filed   within   the   period   of   limitation,   the   appellant<\/p>\n<p>has   not   explained   the   reason   why   he   did   not   file   the<\/p>\n<p>application   before   8.7.2004.     (2)     The   application   is<\/p>\n<p>filed quoting a wrong provision of law.\n<\/p>\n<p>     2.     Article   123   of   the   Limitation   Act   provides   a<\/p>\n<p>period   of   limitation   of   thirty   days   to   make   an<\/p>\n<p>application to set aside a decree passed exparte.   The<\/p>\n<p>time   begins   to   run   from   the   date   of   decree   or   where<\/p>\n<p>summons   or   notice   was   not   duly   served,   when   the<\/p>\n<p>F.A.O. NO.65 OF 2006<\/p>\n<p>                                 ::  2  ::\n<\/p>\n<p>applicant had knowledge of the decree.   In the case on<\/p>\n<p>hand,   time   begins   to   run   from   9.6.2004,   the   date   of<\/p>\n<p>decree.  The application was filed within the period of<\/p>\n<p>limitation provided under Article 123 of the Limitation<\/p>\n<p>Act.     Rule   13   of   Order   IX   of   the   Code   of   Civil<\/p>\n<p>Procedure   provides   that   in   any   case   in   which   a   decree<\/p>\n<p>is passed exparte against a defendant, he may apply to<\/p>\n<p>the   court   by   which   the   decree   was   passed   for   an   order<\/p>\n<p>to   set   it   aside.     The   applicant   has   to   satisfy   the<\/p>\n<p>Court   that   he   was   prevented   by   sufficient   cause   from<\/p>\n<p>appearing when the suit was called on for hearing.   If<\/p>\n<p>an   application   is   filed   within   time,   there   is   no<\/p>\n<p>question of any condonation of delay under Section 5 of<\/p>\n<p>the   Limitation   Act.     The   applicant   need   explain   the<\/p>\n<p>delay   only   if   the   application   is   not   filed   within   the<\/p>\n<p>prescribed period of limitation.  He is not bound under<\/p>\n<p>law to explain the delay in making the application, if<\/p>\n<p>the   application   is   filed   within   time.     Of   course,   the<\/p>\n<p>Court   can   also   consider   as   to   why   the   application   was<\/p>\n<p>not   filed   promptly,   depending   upon   the   facts   and<\/p>\n<p>circumstances   of   each   case,   to   arrive   at   a   conclusion<\/p>\n<p>as   to   whether   the   case   put   forward   by   the   applicant<\/p>\n<p>F.A.O. NO.65 OF 2006<\/p>\n<p>                                 ::  3  ::\n<\/p>\n<p>that   he   was   prevented   by   sufficient   cause   from<\/p>\n<p>appearing   before   Court   is   true   or   not.     Only   for   that<\/p>\n<p>purpose,   the   Court   could   take   into   account   the   fact<\/p>\n<p>that   the   application   was   filed   not   immediately   after<\/p>\n<p>the   exparte   decree   was   passed   but   on   the   last   date   or<\/p>\n<p>immediately   before   the   expiry   of   the   period   of<\/p>\n<p>limitation.     An   application   under   Order   IX   Rule   13<\/p>\n<p>cannot   be   dismissed   on   the   ground   that   the   applicant<\/p>\n<p>had   not   explained   the   delay   from   the   date   on   which   he<\/p>\n<p>recovered from his illness to the date of filing of the<\/p>\n<p>application,   if  the  application  under  Order  IX  Rule  13<\/p>\n<p>was   filed   within   the   period   of   limitation   prescribed<\/p>\n<p>under   Article   123   of   the   Limitation   Act.     The   view<\/p>\n<p>taken   by   the   court   below   that   the   appellant   was   bound<\/p>\n<p>to   explain   the   delay   is,   therefore,   erroneous,   illegal<\/p>\n<p>and   unsustainable.     <a href=\"\/doc\/295872\/\">In  G.P.Srivastava  v.  R.K.Raizada<\/p>\n<p>and   others<\/a>  ((2000)   3   SCC   54),   the   Supreme   Court   has<\/p>\n<p>held   that  the  words  &#8220;was  prevented  by  sufficient  cause<\/p>\n<p>from   appearing&#8221;   must   be   liberally   construed   to   enable<\/p>\n<p>the   court   to   do   complete   justice   between   the   parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>It was held:  &#8220;In a case where the defendant approaches<\/p>\n<p>the   court   immediately   and   within   the   statutory   time<\/p>\n<p>F.A.O. NO.65 OF 2006<\/p>\n<p>                                         ::  4  ::\n<\/p>\n<p>specified,   the   discretion   is   normally   exercised   in   his<\/p>\n<p>favour,   provided   the   absence   was   not   malafide   or<\/p>\n<p>intentional.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>      3.     It   is   well   settled   that   quoting   a   wrong<\/p>\n<p>provision   of   law   is   not   a   ground   for   rejecting   the<\/p>\n<p>prayer in an application.  (See Asher v. Raru (1979 KLT<\/p>\n<p>260);     Thankamma           v.     Vaikom   Town   Juma   Masjid   Mahal<\/p>\n<p>Sangham  (1987   (2)   KLT   780);  Shaji   Varghese  v.  Cherian<\/p>\n<p>(1993   (1)   KLT   133);                New   Model   Bank   Ltd.   (in<\/p>\n<p>liquidation)            v.     P.A.Thomas             (1959   KLT   1237)   and<\/p>\n<p>Kunhikayyumma and another v.  Union of India and others<\/p>\n<p>(AIR   1984   Kerala   184)).   The   appellant   has   filed   the<\/p>\n<p>application   under   rule   9   of   Order   IX   of   the   Code   of<\/p>\n<p>Civil   Procedure.     The   appellant   was   the   defendant   in<\/p>\n<p>the   suit.     Evidently,   Rule   9   of   Order   IX   does     not<\/p>\n<p>apply.     Only   Rule   13   of   Order   IX   applies.     Simply<\/p>\n<p>because a wrong provision of law was quoted, the court<\/p>\n<p>below   was   not   justified   in   dismissing   the   application<\/p>\n<p>on that ground.\n<\/p>\n<p>F.A.O. NO.65 OF 2006<\/p>\n<p>                                ::  5  ::\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.   For the aforesaid reasons, the order passed by<\/p>\n<p>the court below is liable to be set aside.  It has come<\/p>\n<p>out   in   evidence   that   an   exparte   decree   was   passed<\/p>\n<p>against the appellant on an earlier occasion and it was<\/p>\n<p>set aside on his application.  Though strictly speaking<\/p>\n<p>it   may   not   be   relevant   in   considering   the   application<\/p>\n<p>under   Order   IX   Rule   13   on   the   merits,   certainly   it<\/p>\n<p>could   be   a   relevant   factor   in   awarding   costs.     Taking<\/p>\n<p>into   account   the   facts   and   circumstances   of   the   case,<\/p>\n<p>we   are   of   the   view   that   the   appellant   should   be<\/p>\n<p>directed   to   pay   costs   of   Rs.1,000\/-   to   the   respondent<\/p>\n<p>within a period of one month from today as a condition<\/p>\n<p>for setting aside the exparte decree.  If the appellant<\/p>\n<p>fails to pay the costs, the order impugned will remain<\/p>\n<p>in force and the F.A.O will stand dismissed with costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>        The Appeal is allowed as above.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                 (KURIAN JOSEPH)<\/p>\n<p>                                                         Judge<\/p>\n<p>                                                  (K.T.SANKARAN)<\/p>\n<p>                                                         Judge<\/p>\n<p>ahz\/<\/p>\n<p>     KURIAN JOSEPH&amp;<\/p>\n<p>   K.T.SANKARAN, JJ.\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;\n<\/p>\n<p>F.A.O.NO. 65 OF 2006<\/p>\n<p>        JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>   9th February, 2007<\/p>\n<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court John Simon vs T.H. Mohammed Kunju on 9 February, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM FAO No. 65 of 2006() 1. JOHN SIMON, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. T.H. MOHAMMED KUNJU, &#8230; Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.P.HARIDAS For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon&#8217;ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH The Hon&#8217;ble MR. [&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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-175729","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>John Simon vs T.H. Mohammed Kunju on 9 February, 2007 - 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\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"John Simon vs T.H. Mohammed Kunju on 9 February, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-02-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-02-02T00:22:12+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"John Simon vs T.H. Mohammed Kunju on 9 February, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-02-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-02-02T00:22:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007\"},\"wordCount\":908,\"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\\\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007\",\"name\":\"John Simon vs T.H. Mohammed Kunju on 9 February, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-02-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-02-02T00:22:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"John Simon vs T.H. Mohammed Kunju on 9 February, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"John Simon vs T.H. Mohammed Kunju on 9 February, 2007 - 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\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"John Simon vs T.H. Mohammed Kunju on 9 February, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-02-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-02-02T00:22:12+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"John Simon vs T.H. Mohammed Kunju on 9 February, 2007","datePublished":"2007-02-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-02-02T00:22:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007"},"wordCount":908,"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\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007","name":"John Simon vs T.H. Mohammed Kunju on 9 February, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-02-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-02-02T00:22:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/john-simon-vs-t-h-mohammed-kunju-on-9-february-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"John Simon vs T.H. Mohammed Kunju on 9 February, 2007"}]},{"@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\/175729","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=175729"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/175729\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=175729"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=175729"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=175729"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}