{"id":175737,"date":"2008-12-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-12-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008"},"modified":"2018-06-24T04:05:12","modified_gmt":"2018-06-23T22:35:12","slug":"the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008","title":{"rendered":"The Branch Manager vs Saravanan Alias Vathiyalingam on 11 December, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">The Branch Manager vs Saravanan Alias Vathiyalingam on 11 December, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDated : 11\/12\/2008\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.MURGESEN\n\nC.M.A.(MD)No.494 of 2008\nand\nM.P.(MD) No.1 of 2008\n\nThe Branch Manager,\nThe New India Assurance Co., Ltd.,\n66, W.B. Road,\nTrichirappalli.\t \t ...Appellant\/2nd Opposite Party\n\nVs\n\n1.Saravanan alias Vathiyalingam\n\t\t\t ... 1st Respondent\/Petitioner\n2.Mrs.R.Meera\t\t ... 2nd Respondent\/\n\t\t\t     1st Opposite Party\n\nPrayer\n\nAppeal filed under Section 30 of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923,\nagainst the award dated 30.01.2008, passed in W.C.No.244 of 2006 by the\nCommissioner for Workmen's Compensation (Deputy Commissioner for Labour),\nTrichy.\n\n!For Appellant  \t... Mr.K.Murugesan\n^For 1st Respondent \t... Mr.Veerakathiravan\nFor 2nd Respondent\t... No appearance\n\n* * * * *\n:JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tThis Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the judgment and<br \/>\ndecree dated 30.01.2008, passed in W.C.No.244 of 2006 by the Commissioner for<br \/>\nWorkmen&#8217;s Compensation (Deputy Commissioner for Labour), Trichy.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. Before the Commissioner for Workmen&#8217;s Compensation the appellant is the<br \/>\n2nd opposite party, 1st respondent is the applicant and the 2nd respondent is<br \/>\nthe opposite party.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. The brief case of the applicant is as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>On 27.08.2005 at about 24.00 hours, the petitioner\/workman was working as a<br \/>\ncleaner\/loadman under the first opposite party in his MINIDOOR Load Auto bearing<br \/>\nregistration number TN-48-E-2638. When the said vehicle was coming from Karur to<br \/>\nMusiri after loaded the goods, with driver Kumaravelu along with another person<br \/>\nviz. Vadivelu and when the said vehicle was nearing Kulithalai-Musiri Kaveri<br \/>\nBridge Fourteenth Kattai, the said vehicle suddenly dashed behind the lorry<br \/>\nwhich was parked on the road.  In that impact the petitioner sustained grievous<br \/>\ninjuries. Kulithalai Police has registered a case in Cr.No.588 of 2005 regarding<br \/>\nthe said accident. The said lorry was insured with the 2nd opposite party.  The<br \/>\npetitioner was aged 25 years and was earning a sum of Rs.5,000\/- per month at<br \/>\nthe time of accident. Due to the accident, he lost his income. So, he filed<br \/>\napplication claiming a compensation of Rs.5,00,000\/- before the Commissioner for<br \/>\nWorkmen&#8217;s Compensation.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. The 2nd opposite party insurance company filed counter wherein it was<br \/>\ncontended that the 1st respondent&#8217;s vehicle was not insured with the respondent<br \/>\non the date of the alleged accident; 1st  respondent&#8217;s driver had no valid<br \/>\neffective driving licence to drive the vehicle; the age, income, avocation and<br \/>\nother particulars stated in the petition are all specifically denied; the amount<br \/>\nclaimed is excessive, unfair and there is no basis; and hence, the application<br \/>\nis liable to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. Before the Commissioner for Workmen&#8217;s Compensation, on the side of the<br \/>\napplicant, applicant examined himself as P.W.1 along with P.W.2, the doctor and<br \/>\nmarked Exs.P.1 to P.8 and on the side of the 2nd opposite party R.W.1 was<br \/>\nexamined Ex.R1 was marked. There was no oral or documentary evidence adduced on<br \/>\nthe side of the 1st opposite party.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. On consideration of the evidence on both sides, the Commissioner for<br \/>\nWorkmen&#8217;s Compensation fixed the compensation at Rs.1,19,762\/- (Rupees One Lakh<br \/>\nNineteen Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty Two only) to be payable within 30 days<br \/>\nfrom the date of receipt of the order, in default to pay interest at the rate of<br \/>\n12% from the date of petition to till date of payment.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. Challenging the said award passed by the Commissioner for Workmen&#8217;s<br \/>\nCompensation, this appeal has been filed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8. In the memorandum of appeal the following substantial questions of law<br \/>\nwere raised by the appellant:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;(a) Whether the Commissioner for Workmen&#8217;s Compensation is right in<br \/>\nholding that the 1st respondent herein was a workman under the 2nd respondent<br \/>\nherein as per the provisions of the workmen&#8217;s compensation Act 1923?\n<\/p>\n<p>\t (b) Whether the Commissioner for workmen&#8217;s compensation is right in<br \/>\nholding the the 1st respondent herein sustained injuries on account of the<br \/>\nemployment of cleaner\/loadman in the course of his employment under the 2nd<br \/>\nrespondent therein?\n<\/p>\n<p>\t (c) Whether the Commissioner for workmen&#8217;s compensation is right in<br \/>\nholding that when there is a violation of policy condition by the insured, the<br \/>\ninsurer is liable to indemnify him?\n<\/p>\n<p>\t (d) Whether the Commissioner for workmen&#8217;s compensation is right in<br \/>\npassing the award against the appellant alone without passing the award against<br \/>\nit&#8217;s insured?\n<\/p>\n<p>\t (e) Whether the Commissioner is justified in awarding 12% interest<br \/>\nagainst the insurer when there is no contract for the payment of interest<br \/>\nbetween the insurer and the insured?&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9. Point: The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that there is<br \/>\nno employee-employer relationship between the 1st and 2nd respondents herein.<br \/>\nThe first respondent claimed that he is a load man under the 2nd respondent<br \/>\nherein.  The vehicle of the 2nd respondent was insured with the appellant. On<br \/>\nbehalf of the appellant witness Kannan was examined.  He admitted that premium<br \/>\nwas paid for 2 loadmen.  The claimant claimed that he was travelling in the<br \/>\nvehicle as a load man.  The owner of the vehicle has not chosen to examine<br \/>\nherself before the Commissioner for Workmen&#8217;s Compensation.  The evidence of<br \/>\nR.W.1 is unable to shatter the case of the applicant.  So, the evidence of the<br \/>\napplicant is acceptable. Hence, this Court is of the considered view that the<br \/>\napplicant travelled in the vehicle as a loadman and there is employer-employee<br \/>\nrelationship between the 1st and 2nd respondents herein.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10.  The learned counsel for the appellant relied on the decision of this<br \/>\nCourt in <a href=\"\/doc\/1682299\/\">P.Rengasamy v. A.Amalraj (Mad)<\/a> reported in 2002 Factories Journal<br \/>\nReports 936 and argued that the learned Commissioner for Workmen&#8217;s Compensation<br \/>\napplied the factor in this case, which is applicable only in cases of permanent<br \/>\ndisability or death.  The perusal of the record would show that P.W.2<br \/>\nDr.Muralitharan spoke about the permanent disability of the victim, but he has<br \/>\nnot spoke about the loss of earning capacity. As per the decisions of the<br \/>\nHonourable Supreme Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/87422\/\">National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Mubasir Ahmed<\/a> ((2007)<br \/>\n2 Suprement Court Case 349) and the Full Bench of the Kerala High Court in New<br \/>\nIndia Assurance Co. Ltd., v. Sreedharan (1995 ACJ 373) the loss of earning<br \/>\ncapacity must be said by the doctor.  In this case, though the doctor deposed<br \/>\nabout the permanent disability he has not spoken about the loss of earning<br \/>\ncapacity of the victim.  In the light of the above decisions this Court is of<br \/>\nthe considered view that the loss of earning capacity must be spoken by the<br \/>\nDoctor and for that the matter has to be remitted to the Commissioner for<br \/>\nWorkmen&#8217;s Compensation.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11. Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed setting aside<br \/>\nthe award of the Commissioner for Workmen&#8217;s Compensation and the matter is<br \/>\nremitted to  the Commissioner for Workmen&#8217;s Compensation (Deputy Commissioner<br \/>\nfor Labour), Trichirapalli, for re-assessing the loss of earning capacity.  The<br \/>\nCommissioner shall give opportunity to both parties to examine the Doctor, who<br \/>\nwill speak about the loss of earning capacity and thereafter assess the loss of<br \/>\nearning capacity on the basis of the doctor&#8217;s evidence and dispose of the matter<br \/>\nas per law.  No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2008 is closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>sj\t<\/p>\n<p>To:\n<\/p>\n<p>The Commissioner for Workmen&#8217;s Compensation,<br \/>\n(Deputy Commissioner for Labour)<br \/>\nTiruchirappalli.\t\t<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court The Branch Manager vs Saravanan Alias Vathiyalingam on 11 December, 2008 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 11\/12\/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.MURGESEN C.M.A.(MD)No.494 of 2008 and M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2008 The Branch Manager, The New India Assurance Co., Ltd., 66, W.B. Road, Trichirappalli. &#8230;Appellant\/2nd Opposite Party Vs [&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-175737","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 v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>The Branch Manager vs Saravanan Alias Vathiyalingam on 11 December, 2008 - 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\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Branch Manager vs Saravanan Alias Vathiyalingam on 11 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-12-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-23T22:35:12+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Branch Manager vs Saravanan Alias Vathiyalingam on 11 December, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-23T22:35:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1097,\"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\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008\",\"name\":\"The Branch Manager vs Saravanan Alias Vathiyalingam on 11 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-23T22:35:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Branch Manager vs Saravanan Alias Vathiyalingam on 11 December, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"The Branch Manager vs Saravanan Alias Vathiyalingam on 11 December, 2008 - 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\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Branch Manager vs Saravanan Alias Vathiyalingam on 11 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-12-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-23T22:35:12+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Branch Manager vs Saravanan Alias Vathiyalingam on 11 December, 2008","datePublished":"2008-12-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-23T22:35:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008"},"wordCount":1097,"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\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008","name":"The Branch Manager vs Saravanan Alias Vathiyalingam on 11 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-12-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-23T22:35:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-saravanan-alias-vathiyalingam-on-11-december-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Branch Manager vs Saravanan Alias Vathiyalingam on 11 December, 2008"}]},{"@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\/175737","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=175737"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/175737\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=175737"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=175737"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=175737"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}