{"id":183363,"date":"2010-02-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010"},"modified":"2014-03-30T10:50:20","modified_gmt":"2014-03-30T05:20:20","slug":"imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"Imtiaz Ahmed vs Managing Director Tamilnadu … on 17 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Imtiaz Ahmed vs Managing Director Tamilnadu … on 17 February, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao Gowda<\/div>\n
 \n\nIN mp; HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,  \n\nDATED THIS THE 17TH DAY: 01\u00a2.I\u00a7EB_RU_\u00e9\u00a7R*k;'201.0' \n\nPRESEN$:\ufb02\u00b0 \nTHE HONBLE MR. JVLISVFICE 1{:s.REE_15v}1A\u00a7\u00a7\"RA:'3\n  ' '\nTHE HONBLE MR. J\u00abU'sT1'C_Sv}A:..N'\u00a7'\u00a7%;;N'U\u00bbQ0PAm GOWDA\n VM.F,A';N'O:.:V2140.7205?-1 \nM4..F'\u00ab..VA.I\u00a5\u00a7o_._36~v16,\/2Q.O4,\u00ab--M}F.A.N0.3618\/2004.\n=i  ' '*--.I\\\/{.F\u00a7;f?,I\\:'e..V{362'Q\/2004\nM.F.;a';1ito;2':;4o \/:fg;uo;\u00e9'J:;\\av) \n V' V. % V' \"\nIrI1tiazAI;1.L1'r1.ed'. 1  S\n\nS \/ Q.' 'i.:e._t.e AbG\"11,_1 ShLlkbOF.\nAv_g\u00e9I:! about 49 \n\n .R\/all Nt).2&\u00a7Q_,\n2 ' VVV4?\"-,Maa,ih~,A '1e'\u00a5'BEoCK.\nA ~.. K_01'ama11gal  i V V \n=Ba;:1'ga10\u00a3'.\u00e9w.-- 560 034. : Appellant.\n\n{HQ s;~_i7._H'oi_'ia <3: Holla. Adv.)\n\nA' =Mai1agi.r1g D1'1'ecI.0:*,\n\nTar11i]r1ad L1 State 'i'1'ansport\n\nu " "C0rpo_1'ati0r1 11.6..\n\n(Salem Dix\/isi0n--H)\nDharmapuri - 5.\n'1'ami1r1adu. : Respondent.<\/pre>\n
\u20ac%%\/\/hm<\/p>\n
[By Sri. B.Bopanna, Adv.)<\/p>\n
MFA filed u\/S. 173(1) of IV!-‘\\’\/”‘a–:it:\u00ab  f l
\nand award dated 7.11.2003 pasged \u00a311MV~aeN0.,4*l.89’\/v2_O0O on ‘<\/p>\n
the file of the XIX Addl. Srn’a1AixCI.1uASes Qgmdge ,&.”1v.rjACiI’,<\/p>\n
Bangalore [SCCHJ7], partly_4_all0wing”*1;he elalimvvpetifgion f.’_Ol’;<\/p>\n
compensation and seeking en_ha.nCenier;t 0.f_cQni”pe’nsa’ti0n. ‘
\nM.F.A.N0.3615\/200%}
\nBETVVEENR<\/p>\n
The Managing ADiVrecto1i””    _<\/p>\n
Tamilnadu Sta’Eel.Trar1_sp01’1V*’V
\nCorporati_c;.n’–..Lt(:l;;l;_ Salem Djy–i\u00a3_;  V
\nDharn1ap’uri\u00a2-636V7″OE’3. ”\n<\/p>\n
New Bel0n’g\u00a7ngf1’_QV Salein Divi.s_1’_Q11, <\/p>\n
Siiuateel V at No. 121,} JRamakrish._na’ Road,
\nSalenva-63600?–TainlI1:lad’tr=.._ E’:t.ate. : Appellant<\/p>\n
[By M \/3… l?3I9DS’Assr\u00a7(:\u00a7alieea\u00a7 J
\nSrI.’*\u00a33. ‘BQp’ar.1u.a, Adv.)<\/p>\n
\u00a3\u00a7\\:’\u00a7D1    2  \u00ab  ….. 14 v<\/p>\n
‘  “vSVi’n\u00bbt’;vl.2aibunx1isa Siddique.<\/p>\n
T’ 0. I;aLe-‘ Mohammed Siddique.\n<\/p>\n
@ Sjrldaiiaare Sulaiman Lokhanawala.
\nvA\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7\u20acd”.V’ab0ut 56 years.\n<\/p>\n
 2. ‘S-henaz,<\/p>\n
D\/0. late Mohammed Siddique.\n<\/p>\n
@ Siddiaare Sulaiman. Lokhanawala,
\nAged about 34 years,<\/p>\n
 Shaheen,<\/p>\n
D\/0. late ]VIOhElI11fI1\u20acC1 Siddlque,
\n@ Sic:1diaa:’e Sulaiman Lokhanawala.
\nAged about 31 years,<\/p>\n
‘a;\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
4. Zonra.\n<\/p>\n
D\/0. late Mohammed Siddique.\n<\/p>\n
@ Siddiaare Sulairnan Lokhar’1a–\\va1a\ufb01.,<\/p>\n
Aged about 27 years.\n<\/p>\n
All are residing at No.34\/B…’ _<\/p>\n
Shahtaj New Era Society.\n<\/p>\n
Market Yard, Pune–37 _ ~. &
\nMaharastra State.     ‘:’ Respondents<\/p>\n
[By Sri. D.S.Sridhar. Aei\u00a7r..i. *
\nMFA filed t1\/ of   \u00abalg\ufb01airist the Judgment.
\nand award da:’edV_’7.1:i_.2OO3 passed ~in__..l?i\/IV Ne-.4191\/2000 on
\nthe file Of.   S-rnall Causes Judge 8: MACT.
\nBangalore _.-‘[SCC’\u00a3~{+17,l’;: ‘=awa:*;,lifng compensation of
\nRs.3.67_.OOiO2\/”~’ 3\u00ab:;x_zit.h __i”nt_ere’st____VatV58% pa. 8: directing the
\nappei’lant”l<1.eff.ein  ' pay\u00bb the same.
\nM.F.LLig.3613g?2%mg.%V_:'—\n<\/p>\n
BETWEEN;-_ * _  A S S<\/p>\n
 l\\{I’ana,g1’ng f)ii*e-et’o1′.\n<\/p>\n
” \u00ab Ta1nili1ad_u’S_tat,e Transport
\n ‘ ;.Corp<";1fa'i.io'r3ALtd. Salem DiV–}l.
\n D'l1aAfl13.\u00e91pvu'i'iT~536 705.
\n'' Now Belo'njgir'1g to Salem Division,<\/p>\n
Si't_uat.ged at'No. .12, Ramakrishna Road,
\nSalem~S36007, Tarnilnadu State. : Appellant<\/p>\n
it (B"y..&M\/ls. BPDS Associates.<\/p>\n
Sri. B. Bopanna. Adv.)<\/p>\n
__:lAND:–\n<\/p>\n
imiiiaz Ahmed.\n<\/p>\n
S\/o. Late Abdul Sh.ukoor._
\nAged about 50 years.\n<\/p>\n
igf
\n.2′<\/p>\n
ii<\/p>\n
Residing ate No.507.<\/p>\n
\n\n8'\" '8' Main Road,\n\n4\"' Block. Koramangala.    \u00e9 \"\nBangalore 560 034.      \n\n(By M\/s. Holia & Hoila, Adv.)\n\n<\/pre>\n
MFA fiied u \/ S. 173{1′,’AV_ot7,I\\\/IV  against’the’vJ1.1dgme1:tA’<\/p>\n
and award dated 7.11.2003 passed in MV”No’.;4i’:39\/2000 on
\nthe file of the XIX Addi. snia11_ Causes ~ Judge? 81 MACT,
\nBangalore [SCCH\u00a21?), .v’ai%vardi11g’.._ comvpensatioii of
\nRs.2.31..ooo\/~ with i’=ntie1_’es_t  8%gp.a. \u00e9sz directing the
\nappeiiant herein to pay the seinniei   <\/p>\n
M.F.A.No.3t32\u20ac);\/\u00a7.!00\u20acl}A<\/p>\n
   ~
\nThe Ma11}igiAIl 5g Difeo:,o1*’,;_”<\/p>\n
Tann1i}1_nadi;1 Statev-Ti’fan’sip_o1*i: ‘
\nCorporation Ltd; ;v  Div”-II.\n<\/p>\n
Dharn1apu1i’i-636 7′”Q5.\u00bb– V <\/p>\n
Now Beloiiging .E’:Vof.Saivein’ Division.
\nSitiaated at No.12. Ramakrishna Road.<\/p>\n
  saiem.-.g3350o7. T21’I1’Eii11adLl State. : Appellani<\/p>\n
A    Associates,<\/p>\n
a ”  _BV[_Bopanna, Adv .}<\/p>\n
AND:  ” ‘<\/p>\n
 .. Rafi1<tTabani @ Rafik.\n<\/p>\n
S\/o, Gaffer.\n<\/p>\n
A =. Aged about 59 years.\n<\/p>\n
. ‘\u00a7Residing at ‘Noori Bang’,
\n_..nB\/1i1A112.’C’Wing.\n<\/p>\n
Opposite Sarijayiiagar.\n<\/p>\n
Muiiibaifune Road,
\nMumbaiA4O0 612.\n<\/p>\n
Thane District. Maharastra State. : Respondem.
\nJ’;\n<\/p>\n
L5<\/p>\n
{By M \/ s. Holla & Holla, Adv.)<\/p>\n
MFA \ufb01led u \/s. 173(1) of MV act against ta; Judgixnentj At t
\nand award dated 7.1 1.2003 passed_;i,11  No’.’4v1-913\/2000 on W
\nthe file of the XIX Addl. Small :Caus’es_ Judge  MACT;<\/p>\n
Bangalore (SCCH–1’7}, awarding  s compensation’-si.___ <\/p>\n
Rs.1,93,000\/– with interest at 8\u00b0\/o?__p.’a_. frornsthe :date~..pof._V<\/p>\n
petition till realisation.\n<\/p>\n
THESE APPEALS coM1Nl’G-.oN; Fora  THIS<\/p>\n
DAY, SREEDHAR RAG; 4%,. DELI Et2.Eo__THE FOLLOWENG:<\/p>\n
\u00abJr .U-Dw\ufb01ij\ufb01im N”1~    <\/p>\n
The    ‘:_MFA'”‘*——1\\lo.2140\/O4 {MVC<\/p>\n
No.4189\/ ttrasllllauliiiiliatelloffthe car. One Mohammed<\/p>\n
Sidditgi warsxthe;  At Yedavanahalli N.H.7<\/p>\n
near Anekallptliexcarpwas\u00abproceeding towards Bangalore, from<\/p>\n
sidelwards entered  The bus belonging to Tamil Nadu<\/p>\n
 \u00abState  Corporation {for short ‘TNSTC’) was coming<\/p>\n
A  ‘V   also proceeding towards Bangalore. The car<\/p>\n
after eiateririg the main road was hit by the bus belonging to<\/p>\n
 AA  bus resulted in death of driver and injury to the<\/p>\n
l  inniates of the car.\n<\/p>\n
2. The petitioner sustained fracture of 2136 and 3″‘
\nrib, head injury with neurological complications. The<\/p>\n
evidence PW4- doctor who treated the patient immediately<\/p>\n
\u20ac\/<\/p>\n
6<\/span><\/p>\n
after the accident has stated that at the time of <\/p>\n
petitioner was advised to have follow up check!uvp’-bylaeye’ <\/p>\n
surgeon for his blurred vision and alsoby-, neu_1lfo.surgeon’.g<\/p>\n
The petitioner has sustained blurredfyisiozn of b_otri\u00bb.e3\/eds: ._<\/p>\n
percentage of disability for blurijed, vision .of.,one’isl’ 10\u00b0\/oil’<\/p>\n
in wc. Act and for both the'”eye.s: the disabi’1it},r-Kivould be
\n20%. The total body  disability, it is<\/p>\n
just and proper”y:asse_ss  disability at 25%.<\/p>\n
 \u00a7ppetit1lonei=vl.was’ll a textile shop. The
\nincome tax  .a1_’1nual income is at Rs.88000\/–
\nfor the operiod. V  l999–2000. The income loss<\/p>\n
proportionate\u00bb  would be Rs.22000\/– p.a. The<\/p>\n
 agedwabout 46 years. Hence l3 multiplier will<\/p>\n
  of future income on account of disability<\/p>\n
w’o.uld,__v ‘ be .fRs.22 , 000{incoIne)X 1 3{multip1ie1′}=Rs.2,86,000 \/ –.<\/p>\n
 .A Thellpetitioner has produced medical bills for Rs.l,50,000\/–<\/p>\n
0′  by way of additional evidence bill for Rs.30000\/– is<\/p>\n
 produced. In all, the petitioner is awarded a sum of<\/p>\n
Rs.200000\/~ for medical and incidental expenses. The<\/p>\n
petitioner is granted a compensation of Rs.50000\/– towards<\/p>\n
V’ wtoivards Bangalore<\/p>\n
7<\/span><\/p>\n
pain and agony. Rs.25000\/~ is awarded towards<\/p>\n
amenities and future discomfort on account of   <\/p>\n
petitioner may be under treatIner;tAl’Vor’sb0ut.;ii2\u00a7fo’._months;–\u00bbg<\/p>\n
Hence, Rs.l5000\/– is awarded. towardslloss of ‘income  ._<\/p>\n
laid up period.\n<\/p>\n
4-. The  ealgsolh  appeals. MFA
\nNo.36 18 \/2000′  tiled iagainst   against the
\nappellant. _      “”‘ilIo.2 1 40 \/2004 has
\nchallenged The tribunal has
\nfound that  _’ occurred on account of the
\nnegligence’ of the  “bus. The charge sheet material
\ndiscloses thatvof the car entered N.H.7 to proceed<\/p>\n
from the sideways. Almost at the mouth<\/p>\n
 _  the accident has occurred. The sketch of the<\/p>\n
scenev.__”of.V the occurrence discloses that there were brake<\/p>\n
 .. marlis hf the bus to an extent of about 45 ft. In the criminal<\/p>\n
Q  case the driver of the bus is convicted. The permitted speed<\/p>\n
 limit for the heavy vehicle on the National High way is 60<\/p>\n
km. per hour. The presence of brake marks would suggest<\/p>\n
that the bus was travelling at a high speed than the<\/p>\n
permitted limit otherwise, there would not have <\/p>\n
marks. This suggests the element of negligenceon  K<\/p>\n
of the bus driver.\n<\/p>\n
5. On close scruti~nly’\u00ab-..there*~,_is some” ‘.Varnou1f\u00a7t def<\/p>\n
negligence on the part of of” also. It is
\nincumbent upon the  L c9.1fl..lAto~have observed the
\nvehicular movement of N   make an entry.
\nThe accident, the car entered
\nand traveledeaatl   that we \ufb01nd that there is
\n__  to an extent of 25% and
\nnegligence’ of “the TNSRT C is around 75%. The<\/p>\n
trilzguraal, has’-hovvever. held that the accident occurred solely<\/p>\n
   thewnegligence of the TNSRTC which appears<\/p>\n
   :”inVcorrevct. Therefore, the aggregate compensation<\/p>\n
assessedltisAlRs.6,06,0()0\/-. 25% is to be deducted towards<\/p>\n
 .. contributory negligence on the part of the car driver. Hence,<\/p>\n
it  TNSTC is liable to pay compensation of Rs.4,54,500\/\u00ab~<\/p>\n
 with 6% interest from the date of the petition till payment.<\/p>\n
66\/<\/p>\n
9<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
6. MFA No.3616\/2004 pertains to the award in<\/p>\n
respect of the driver of the car i.e., Mohammed The<\/p>\n
deceased was aged about 56 years. The <\/p>\n
income tax assessee. He was Working as a4″rnarl{et_ing’i’oo;’u ‘<\/p>\n
ordinator in Engineering Works.”-BIis”_’ineorrte is asse_ss.ed–:at<\/p>\n
123.4000\/– pm. The wife”and._thr\u00e9e Vdaug\u00a7ite’r.s””-hate \ufb01led’<\/p>\n
petition seeking comp_ensation.u:’\n<\/p>\n
7. As per   ‘is to be deducted
\ntowards personal exp’enses;. Would enure to the<\/p>\n
benefit of f’fhe total loss of dependency
\n X12 {months} X 9 (multiplier)<\/p>\n
.~;;;;s.3\u00a7t.45,o’0o,\/g.” The Wife is entitled to Rs.25000\/– towards<\/p>\n
  the petitioners together entitled to Rs.25,000\/–<\/p>\n
it    expectancy and Rs.1000O\/– towards funeral<\/p>\n
Aexpensesd” A In all the petitioners are entitled to a totai<\/p>\n
 AA eonipensation of Rs\/\u00a305600\/–. In the said amount 25% is to<\/p>\n
  “be:deducted towards contributory negligence of the car. The<\/p>\n
 petitioners are entitled to a compensation of Rs.3,0-41,200\/–<\/p>\n
with interest at 6% 13.3.. from the date of the petition till<\/p>\n
payment.\n<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
8. M.F.A.No.3620\/2004 pertains to tvhelaward<\/p>\n
passed in respect of one Ra\ufb01k Tabani on a=;’courit’._iof:_.Vtlie<\/p>\n
personal injuries sustained by him in the He has <\/p>\n
sustained multipie fractures of   and i<\/p>\n
left side 3 to 991 rib. The t1’ib’unai has awarded-5 conipefjgsatiorip<\/p>\n
of Rs.193000\/–. The injured’i’s…ag’ed aboL1t’p”5;”;V’:ye1a.rs. He was
\nworking as a marketing.._co–r5rdinatoriin.an Engirieering firm.
\nHis income is assessed ‘at The total body<\/p>\n
disability is .asses.’sed at 20%. “f[‘tie:_”in.con1e loss proportionate<\/p>\n
to  The total future loss of
\ninconie ‘wou1d”b\u00e9= .Rs…s;oej{‘1ncome}X12(month}x9(mu1t1p1:er)w
\nRs.86,4(lO*<,{b-.  is entitled to Rs.3000O\/– towards<\/p>\n
  agony;v-.–.Rs.l2000\/- is granted towards ioss of<\/p>\n
' .\u00bbVamenitiesV*a:nd_ future discomfort on account of disability.<\/p>\n
.' Medical are produced for Rs. 1,10,000\/–. Rs.1,30,000\/ —<\/p>\n
is "granted towards medical and incidental expenses. The<\/p>\n
~ A aggregate of compensation assessed is much more than what<\/p>\n
 "awarded. Hence, the request for reduction of the<\/p>\n
compensation rejected.\n<\/p>\n
E E<\/p>\n
In that view. the above appeals are dispI6\u00e9e’d .’_0\u00a7.’: _i;1.1r.;LFr2%;<\/p>\n
terms indicated above.\n<\/p>\n
 sa,= <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Imtiaz Ahmed vs Managing Director Tamilnadu … on 17 February, 2010 Author: K.Sreedhar Rao Gowda IN mp; HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY: 01\u00a2.I\u00a7EB_RU_\u00e9\u00a7R*k;’201.0′ PRESEN$:\ufb02\u00b0 THE HONBLE MR. JVLISVFICE 1{:s.REE_15v}1A\u00a7\u00a7”RA:’3 ‘ ‘ THE HONBLE MR. J\u00abU’sT1’C_Sv}A:..N’\u00a7’\u00a7%;;N’U\u00bbQ0PAm GOWDA VM.F,A’;N’O:.:V2140.7205?-1 M4..F’\u00ab..VA.I\u00a5\u00a7o_._36~v16,\/2Q.O4,\u00ab–M}F.A.N0.3618\/2004. =i ‘ ‘*–.I\\\/{.F\u00a7;f?,I\\:’e..V{362’Q\/2004 M.F.;a’;1ito;2′:;4o \/:fg;uo;\u00e9’J:;\\av) V’ V. % V’ ” […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-183363","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nImtiaz Ahmed vs Managing Director Tamilnadu ... on 17 February, 2010 - 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\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Imtiaz Ahmed vs Managing Director Tamilnadu ... on 17 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-02-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-03-30T05:20:20+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Imtiaz Ahmed vs Managing Director Tamilnadu … on 17 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-03-30T05:20:20+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1599,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010\",\"name\":\"Imtiaz Ahmed vs Managing Director Tamilnadu ... on 17 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-03-30T05:20:20+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Imtiaz Ahmed vs Managing Director Tamilnadu … on 17 February, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Imtiaz Ahmed vs Managing Director Tamilnadu ... on 17 February, 2010 - 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\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Imtiaz Ahmed vs Managing Director Tamilnadu ... on 17 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-03-30T05:20:20+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Imtiaz Ahmed vs Managing Director Tamilnadu … on 17 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-03-30T05:20:20+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010"},"wordCount":1599,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010","name":"Imtiaz Ahmed vs Managing Director Tamilnadu ... on 17 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-03-30T05:20:20+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/imtiaz-ahmed-vs-managing-director-tamilnadu-on-17-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Imtiaz Ahmed vs Managing Director Tamilnadu … on 17 February, 2010"}]},{"@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\/183363","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=183363"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/183363\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=183363"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=183363"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=183363"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}