{"id":17979,"date":"2008-02-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-02-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008"},"modified":"2016-11-27T07:12:20","modified_gmt":"2016-11-27T01:42:20","slug":"manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008","title":{"rendered":"Manu Santosh &amp; Anr vs K.Achutha Panicker &amp; Ors on 14 February, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Manu Santosh &amp; Anr vs K.Achutha Panicker &amp; Ors on 14 February, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: S.B. Sinha, V.S.Sirpurkar<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  1536 of 2008\n\nPETITIONER:\nManu Santosh &amp; Anr\n\nRESPONDENT:\nK.Achutha Panicker &amp; Ors\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 14\/02\/2008\n\nBENCH:\nS.B. SINHA &amp; V.S.SIRPURKAR\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>ORDER<\/p>\n<p>CIVIL APPEAL NO.1536 \/2008<br \/>\n(@SLP(C) No.7630\/2006)<br \/>\nWith<br \/>\nC.A.No.1540\/2008 (@ SLP(C) No.7938\/2006)<br \/>\nC.A.No.1537\/2008 (@ SLP(C) No.7988\/2006)<\/p>\n<p>\t\tLeave granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tApplication of Section 3 of the Kerala Service Inam Lands ( Vesting<br \/>\nand Infringement) Act, 1981 (for short hereinafter referred to as &#8216;the said Act&#8217;) vis-a-<br \/>\nvis the possession of the parties is the question involved in these appeals which arise<br \/>\nout of judgments and orders dated 24.2.2006  passed by a Division Bench of the<br \/>\nKerala High Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe parties hereto claim settlement from the original   Inam  holder Kali<br \/>\nPillai Gopala Pillai. Appellant(s) claim that the said Inam holder settled 43 cents out<br \/>\nof 49 cents in Survey No.1983 of Madathuvilakom village in their favour. One Nani<br \/>\nDevki predecessor in interest of the respondents(now represented by Lrs.being<br \/>\nrespondent Nos. 1-5) claimed that they were also the lessees of the said Inam holder.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">-1-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>\tThe son of the original Inam holder Gopalan Pillai Velappan<br \/>\nNair(respondent No.9 herein) filed a suit for recovery of possession of the said<br \/>\nproperty with arrears of rent against the appellant which was decreed.<br \/>\n\tHowever, it appears that the execution petition to enforce the said decree<br \/>\nwas pending. Respondents herein claim that they had all along been in possession of<br \/>\nthe said property. In fact they obstructed execution of the said decree on 14.8.1971.<br \/>\nAccording to the respondents the said suit was a collusive one.<br \/>\n\tThe said Act came into force with effect from 6.8.1981. Appointed date has<br \/>\nbeen defined in the Act; meaning the date from which the said  Act came into force.<br \/>\n\tIndisputably, in terms of Section 3 of the Act, the Inam land vests in the<br \/>\nGovernment. The Act provides for grant of settlement in favour of a person who may<br \/>\nfile an application therefor being in possession of the property.<br \/>\n\tFor obtaining settlement not only  the appellant but also the said Nani Devki<br \/>\nas also aforementioned Gopalan Pillai Velappan Nair filed their respective<br \/>\napplications.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tAn inquiry was made by the Settlement Officer. It was held that up of<br \/>\nMarch, 1981 the aforementioned Nani Devki was in possession but she was forcibly<br \/>\ndispossessed by the appellant herein. However, the matter was remanded by the<br \/>\nDistrict Collector by an order dated 23.10.1987. Pursuant to or in furtherance of the<br \/>\nsaid order dated 23.10.1987 a fresh inquiry was held and in its report the Settlement<br \/>\nOfficer<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">-2-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>recorded that the property in question was in possession of the appellant herein as on<br \/>\nthe appointed date. The land in<br \/>\nquestion was directed to be settled in favour of the appellant.<br \/>\n\tAggrieved by and dis-satisfied therewith Nani Devki preferred an appeal<br \/>\nwhich was dismissed. The revision application filed before the State was also<br \/>\ndismissed by an order dated 26.2.1990. Nani Devki filed a writ petition before the<br \/>\nHigh Court. By reason of a deed  of assignment executed on 6.11.1992, the property<br \/>\nwas transferred. On 16.3.1999, a learned Single Judge of the Kerala High Court<br \/>\nallowed the writ petition. An intra Court appeal filed thereagainst has been  dismissed<br \/>\nby reason of the impugned judgment.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIndisputably, the learned Single Judge and consequently the Division Bench<br \/>\nof the High Court arrived at a decision that the Settlement Officer, the Appellate<br \/>\nAuthority as also the Revisional Authority committed a serious error in ignoring the<br \/>\nfirst report as also the documents filed by the respondents herein,namely, Exhibits<br \/>\nA-1, A-2 and A3.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tOn the said findings it was directed as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;9. From what is stated above, it could be seen that dismissal of the<br \/>\napplication filed by the first petitioner and ordering assignment of the holding in<br \/>\nfavour of the 4th respondent is not in accordance with law and cannot be justified.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">\t\t-3-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>\tIn the result the original petition is allowed. Exhibits P3,P4,and P5 are<br \/>\nquashed. O.A.Nos. 76 of 1982,640 of 1982 and 861 of 1982 are restored to file and<br \/>\nremanded to the<br \/>\nthird respondent for fresh disposal in accordance with law and in the light of the<br \/>\nobservations made in this judgment.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe Division Bench of the High Court while affirming<br \/>\nthe said view, held:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8221; 6. Of course the appellant-4th respondent heavily would rely on the findings<br \/>\nregarding his possession in OS No.953\/1966 and A.S.No.717 of 1972 arising<br \/>\ntherefrom. But that is a suit between the 4th respondent and 5th respondent in the O.P.<br \/>\nwhich cannot bind the petitioners in the OP since the 1st petitioner was not a party to<br \/>\nthe suit.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tOnce the lower authorities have categorically found, as a matter of fact,<br \/>\nthat the 1st petitioner was in possession till about March, 1981 and she was<br \/>\nforcibly dispossessed by the fourth respondent. We are unable to find any<br \/>\ninfirmity in the findings of the learned Single Judge. In that view, we are<br \/>\nof the opinion that there is no illegality whatsoever in the judgment of the<br \/>\nlearned Single Judge and these appeals deserve to be dismissed. We do so.<br \/>\nBut taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case we do not<br \/>\nmake any order as to costs..&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt was observed that in view of the fact that the appellant herein did not<br \/>\nquestion the purported findings of the Settlement Officer dated 26.2.1985, wherein the<br \/>\nSettlement Officer and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 therein had found the first<br \/>\nrespondent to be in actual possession till about March 1981 and she was forcibly<br \/>\nevicted by the fourth respondent from the land, the order of the revenue authority<br \/>\nwhich was impugned therein could not be sustained.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tMr.L.N. Rao, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant<br \/>\nwould submit that having regard to<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">-4-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>the fact that the inquiry in the first round of litigation came to an end and fresh<br \/>\ninquiry was initiated in terms of the order of the District Collector dated 23.10.1987,<br \/>\nthe impugned judgment cannot be sustained. We find considerable force therein.<br \/>\n\tThe Settlement Officer for the purpose of grant of settlement of service Inam<br \/>\nlands was bound to arrive at a finding of fact as to who amongst the applicants was in<br \/>\npossession of the land in question as on 6.8.1981.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tFor the said purpose it was obligatory on the part of the said authority to<br \/>\nconsider both the oral and documentary evidences produced by the parties.<br \/>\n\tKeeping in view the nature of the order passed by the District Collector on<br \/>\n23.10.1987,in our opinion, the exercise pursuant to order passed by the learned Single<br \/>\nJudge as also the Division Bench should be carried out un-influenced by any<br \/>\nobservation made by the High Court. It goes without saying that the Settlement<br \/>\nOfficer shall determine the question in regard to the possession of the land by the<br \/>\nrespective claimants as on 6.8.1981 strictly on the basis of the materials which are<br \/>\nplaced by the parties and in accordance with law.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe impugned judgment is set aside. The appeals are allowed with the<br \/>\naforementioned observations.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">-5-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>\tParties to maintain Status-Quo till the matter is decided by the Settlement<br \/>\nOfficer.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Manu Santosh &amp; Anr vs K.Achutha Panicker &amp; Ors on 14 February, 2008 Bench: S.B. Sinha, V.S.Sirpurkar CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 1536 of 2008 PETITIONER: Manu Santosh &amp; Anr RESPONDENT: K.Achutha Panicker &amp; Ors DATE OF JUDGMENT: 14\/02\/2008 BENCH: S.B. SINHA &amp; V.S.SIRPURKAR JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT ORDER CIVIL APPEAL NO.1536 \/2008 (@SLP(C) [&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-17979","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Manu Santosh &amp; Anr vs K.Achutha Panicker &amp; Ors on 14 February, 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\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Manu Santosh &amp; Anr vs K.Achutha Panicker &amp; Ors on 14 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-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=\"2008-02-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-27T01:42:20+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\\\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Manu Santosh &amp; Anr vs K.Achutha Panicker &amp; Ors on 14 February, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-02-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-27T01:42:20+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1179,\"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\\\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008\",\"name\":\"Manu Santosh &amp; Anr vs K.Achutha Panicker &amp; Ors on 14 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-02-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-27T01:42:20+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Manu Santosh &amp; Anr vs K.Achutha Panicker &amp; Ors on 14 February, 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":"Manu Santosh &amp; Anr vs K.Achutha Panicker &amp; Ors on 14 February, 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\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Manu Santosh &amp; Anr vs K.Achutha Panicker &amp; Ors on 14 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-02-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-27T01:42:20+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\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Manu Santosh &amp; Anr vs K.Achutha Panicker &amp; Ors on 14 February, 2008","datePublished":"2008-02-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-27T01:42:20+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008"},"wordCount":1179,"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\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008","name":"Manu Santosh &amp; Anr vs K.Achutha Panicker &amp; Ors on 14 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-02-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-27T01:42:20+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manu-santosh-anr-vs-k-achutha-panicker-ors-on-14-february-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Manu Santosh &amp; Anr vs K.Achutha Panicker &amp; Ors on 14 February, 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\/17979","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=17979"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17979\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=17979"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=17979"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=17979"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}