{"id":180159,"date":"2009-10-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009"},"modified":"2017-06-18T10:02:03","modified_gmt":"2017-06-18T04:32:03","slug":"varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"Varghese Mathew vs Santhamma John on 22 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Varghese Mathew vs Santhamma John on 22 October, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nMat.Appeal.No. 114 of 2004()\n\n\n1. VARGHESE MATHEW, S\/O. LATE MATHEW,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. SANTHAMMA JOHN, D\/O. JOHN (LATE),\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.N.ACHUTHA KURUP (SR.)\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.SATHISH NINAN\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT\nThe Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI\n\n Dated :22\/10\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.\n                      ------------------------------------\n                   Mat.Appeal No.114 of 2004\n                      -------------------------------------\n             Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2009\n\n                               JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
BASANT, J.\n<\/p>\n
     The respondent before the court below is the appellant. He<\/p>\n
is the husband of the respondent. He assails the ex parte order<\/p>\n
passed by the court below allowing the claim petition filed by his<\/p>\n
wife, the respondent in this appeal and directing him to pay an<\/p>\n
amount of Rs.1 lakh along with interest @ 6% per annum from<\/p>\n
24.02.1992.    The parties are Christians by religion.                  Their<\/p>\n
marriage took place on 02.03.1992. Betrothal had taken place<\/p>\n
earlier on 24.02.1992.       The appellant was employed abroad.<\/p>\n
After a few days’ residence together, the appellant\/husband went<\/p>\n
back to his place of employment abroad. The respondent\/wife<\/p>\n
gave birth to a child on 01.11.1992.                      It appears that the<\/p>\n
respondent had reservations about the legitimacy and paternity<\/p>\n
of the child as the child at the time of birth on 01.11.92 was a<\/p>\n
full grown child.    The marriage took place on 02.03.1992.<\/p>\n
Acrimony developed between the parties. The husband was not<\/p>\n
thereafter interested in continuing the marital tie.<\/p>\n
Mat.Appeal No.114 of 2004       2<\/span><\/p>\n
     2.    The wife filed the present petition claiming return of<\/p>\n
20 sovereigns of gold ornaments which were allegedly taken by<\/p>\n
the husband at the time of marriage and an amount of Rs.1 lakh<\/p>\n
which was allegedly paid to him.          The husband entered<\/p>\n
appearance and resisted the said claim. According to him, no<\/p>\n
such amounts were received and no ornaments were retained by<\/p>\n
him. According to him separate residence occurred on account<\/p>\n
of the reasons indicated above.\n<\/p>\n
     3.    The petition was initially filed before the civil court<\/p>\n
and the same was transferred to the Family Court after its<\/p>\n
establishment. The court below had directed the appellant to<\/p>\n
appear personally. A couple of opportunities were given to the<\/p>\n
husband to appear before the court. The husband, who was<\/p>\n
employed abroad, did not appear. In these circumstances, on<\/p>\n
14.07.03, the husband was set ex parte and the matter was<\/p>\n
posted for evidence.    At that stage, I.A.No.934 of 2003 was<\/p>\n
immediately filed by his counsel. In that petition, the counsel<\/p>\n
prayed on behalf of the appellant that the order dated 14.07.03<\/p>\n
setting him ex parte may be set aside. He further prayed that<\/p>\n
opportunity may be given to the counsel for the appellant to<\/p>\n
cross examine the claimant\/wife and her witnesses, who were<\/p>\n
Mat.Appeal No.114 of 2004       3<\/span><\/p>\n
proposed to be examined. He also prayed that permission may<\/p>\n
be granted to the counsel to produce the documents on behalf of<\/p>\n
the appellant in his absence.\n<\/p>\n
     4.   When that petition came up for hearing on 21.08.09,<\/p>\n
the appellant was not present. On the short ground that the<\/p>\n
appellant was absent, the said I.A was dismissed. Thereafter the<\/p>\n
claimant examined herself as PW1 and two witnesses as PWs 2<\/p>\n
and 3. The husband did not\/could not adduce any evidence. As<\/p>\n
the petition filed by his counsel as I.A.934 of 2003 was<\/p>\n
dismissed, the counsel for the appellant could not also<\/p>\n
participate in the proceedings. It was, in these circumstances,<\/p>\n
that the impugned order was passed on 01.11.2003.<\/p>\n
     5.   Before     us   the    learned    counsel   for    the<\/p>\n
appellant\/husband and respondent\/wife have advanced their<\/p>\n
arguments. The marital tie has not been dissolved in accordance<\/p>\n
with law and there is no dispute on that aspect. The learned<\/p>\n
counsel for the appellant assails the impugned order on the<\/p>\n
following sole ground.\n<\/p>\n
     6.   The court below erred grossly in not granting the<\/p>\n
appellant reasonable opportunity to defend the claim raised<\/p>\n
against him.\n<\/p>\n
Mat.Appeal No.114 of 2004         4<\/span><\/p>\n
The Ground<\/p>\n
     7.    Admittedly the appellant was employed abroad. The<\/p>\n
matter was received on transfer by the Family Court on<\/p>\n
25.02.03. As the husband was employed abroad, he could not<\/p>\n
appear. On 14.07.03, he was set ex parte on the ground that he<\/p>\n
was not personally present. The I.A filed by his counsel to set<\/p>\n
aside the ex parte order and to permit him to contest the claim<\/p>\n
on behalf of the appellant was also dismissed and the prayer was<\/p>\n
rejected. Long later on 01.11.2003, the impugned order was<\/p>\n
passed by the Family Court.\n<\/p>\n
     8.    The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the<\/p>\n
court must have taken note of the fact that the appellant, who<\/p>\n
has only a petty employment at his place of employment abroad,<\/p>\n
could not come to India as desired by him.              In these<\/p>\n
circumstances, his absence should not have led to an ex parte<\/p>\n
order being passed against him when he was willing to<\/p>\n
participate in the proceedings through his counsel and had made<\/p>\n
a specific application for the said purpose as I.A.No.934 of 2003.<\/p>\n
The learned counsel, in these circumstances, prays that the<\/p>\n
appellant may be given an opportunity to contest the<\/p>\n
proceedings and establish his case.\n<\/p>\n
Mat.Appeal No.114 of 2004        5<\/span><\/p>\n
      9.   The learned counsel for the respondent\/claimant<\/p>\n
contends that the matter has been dragging on for quite a long<\/p>\n
period of time unnecessarily.      The appellant had no serious<\/p>\n
intention of contesting the proceedings and that is why he did<\/p>\n
not at all appear before court from 28.05.03 to 01.11.03. If he<\/p>\n
had any serious intention to participate in the proceedings and<\/p>\n
contest the claim, he would have appeared before court at least<\/p>\n
on one date during the long period of 28.05.03 to 01.11.2003. In<\/p>\n
these circumstances, it is prayed that this appeal may be<\/p>\n
dismissed and the impugned order upheld.\n<\/p>\n
      10. We have considered all the relevant circumstances.<\/p>\n
The contumacious failure of the appellant to appear before court<\/p>\n
from 28.05.03 to 01.11.03 notwithstanding, we find merit in the<\/p>\n
prayer for setting aside the ex parte decree. We particularly<\/p>\n
take note of the fact that despite expression of willingness of the<\/p>\n
counsel to proceed with the matter in the absence of the<\/p>\n
appellant, opportunity was denied to the counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellant to participate in the proceedings. We do take note of<\/p>\n
the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent that the<\/p>\n
respondent is put to unnecessary hardship and difficulties for no<\/p>\n
fault of hers. Having considered all the relevant circumstances,<\/p>\n
Mat.Appeal No.114 of 2004       6<\/span><\/p>\n
we take the view that this appeal can be allowed and the<\/p>\n
impugned ex parte order can be set aside subject to appropriate<\/p>\n
terms and conditions.\n<\/p>\n
     11. In the result:\n<\/p>\n
     a)    This Matrimonial Appeal is allowed subject to<\/p>\n
conditions;\n<\/p>\n
     b)    The impugned order shall be set aside on the<\/p>\n
following terms and conditions:\n<\/p>\n
     (i)   The appellant shall deposit before the court below a<\/p>\n
further amount of Rs.5,000\/- (Rupees Five thousand only) as cost<\/p>\n
on or before 01.12.2009;\n<\/p>\n
     (ii)  If deposited, the said amount of Rs.5,000\/- shall<\/p>\n
forthwith be released to the respondent;\n<\/p>\n
     (iii) The amount of Rs.2,000\/- (Rupees Two thousand only)<\/p>\n
which remains in deposit in this Court shall also be released to<\/p>\n
the respondent forthwith;\n<\/p>\n
     (iv) The parties shall appear before the Family Court on<\/p>\n
02.12.09. If the amount is deposited, the impugned order shall<\/p>\n
stand set aside and the Family Court shall proceed to dispose of<\/p>\n
the claim afresh in accordance with law;\n<\/p>\n
Mat.Appeal No.114 of 2004        7<\/span><\/p>\n
     (v)    We make it clear that the option of the respondent to<\/p>\n
claim the entire amounts demanded in O.P.No.158 of 2003 shall<\/p>\n
remain unfettered;\n<\/p>\n
     (vi) She can also adduce further evidence as may be found<\/p>\n
to be necessary by her;\n<\/p>\n
     (vii) The court below shall dispose of the case as<\/p>\n
expeditiously as possible – at any rate, within a period of 3<\/p>\n
months from 02.12.09;\n<\/p>\n
     (viii) If the amount of Rs.5,000\/- is not deposited by the<\/p>\n
appellant as directed, the Family Court shall record that fact on<\/p>\n
02.12.09 and thereupon the impugned order shall continue to<\/p>\n
remain in force;\n<\/p>\n
     (ix) The amount of Rs.2,000\/- already deposited before<\/p>\n
this Court and the amount of Rs.5,000\/- to be deposited in court<\/p>\n
as directed in clause (i) above shall be reckoned as cost and shall<\/p>\n
not be adjusted towards the amount, if any, found ultimately due<\/p>\n
in O.P.No.158 of 2003.\n<\/p>\n
                                       (R.BASANT, JUDGE)<\/p>\n
                                      (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE)
\nrtr\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Varghese Mathew vs Santhamma John on 22 October, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Mat.Appeal.No. 114 of 2004() 1. VARGHESE MATHEW, S\/O. LATE MATHEW, … Petitioner Vs 1. SANTHAMMA JOHN, D\/O. JOHN (LATE), … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.V.N.ACHUTHA KURUP (SR.) For Respondent :SRI.SATHISH NINAN The Hon’ble MR. Justice R.BASANT […]<\/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-180159","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nVarghese Mathew vs Santhamma John on 22 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Varghese Mathew vs Santhamma John on 22 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-10-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-06-18T04:32:03+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Varghese Mathew vs Santhamma John on 22 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-18T04:32:03+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1303,\"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\\\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009\",\"name\":\"Varghese Mathew vs Santhamma John on 22 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-18T04:32:03+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Varghese Mathew vs Santhamma John on 22 October, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Varghese Mathew vs Santhamma John on 22 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Varghese Mathew vs Santhamma John on 22 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-06-18T04:32:03+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Varghese Mathew vs Santhamma John on 22 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-18T04:32:03+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009"},"wordCount":1303,"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\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009","name":"Varghese Mathew vs Santhamma John on 22 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-18T04:32:03+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-mathew-vs-santhamma-john-on-22-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Varghese Mathew vs Santhamma John on 22 October, 2009"}]},{"@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\/180159","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=180159"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/180159\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=180159"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=180159"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=180159"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}