{"id":184146,"date":"2008-08-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008"},"modified":"2014-09-02T00:07:05","modified_gmt":"2014-09-01T18:37:05","slug":"k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"K.Ascar Ali vs V.P.Yusuf on 19 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
K.Ascar Ali vs V.P.Yusuf on 19 August, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRCRev..No. 114 of 2008()\n\n\n1. K.ASCAR ALI, AGED 40 YRS, S\/O.UMMERKUTTY\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. MANU, AGED 67 YRS, W\/O.UMMERKUTTY,\n3. MASHOOD, S\/O.UMMERKUTTY, SAIKRIPA,\n4. SUBAIDA, D\/O.UMMERKUTTY, SAIKRIPA,\n5. SHAHANAVAS, S\/O.UMMERKUTTY,SAIKRIA,\n6. SAFEERA, S\/O.UMMERKUTTY, SAIKRIPA,\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. V.P.YUSUF,S\/O.MAYANKUTTY 58 YEARS,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.VALSALAN\n\n                For Respondent  :SMT.PRABHA R.MENON\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMAN\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR\n\n Dated :19\/08\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n                                  P.R.Raman &\n                       T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ.\n                   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                        R.C.R.Nos.113 & 114 of 2008\n                     - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                  Dated this the 19th day of August, 2008.\n\n                                    O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
Ramachandran Nair, J.\n<\/p>\n
       These two revision petitions arise from the common judgment<\/p>\n
rendered by the Rent Control Appellate Authority, Vadakara in<\/p>\n
R.C.A.Nos.26\/2007 and 27\/2007. The tenants are the revision petitioners.<\/p>\n
Eviction is ordered under Sections 11(2)(b) and 11(3)                   of the Kerala<\/p>\n
Buildings (Lease & Rent Control) Act, 1965 (for short ‘the Act’) by the Rent<\/p>\n
Control Court which stands confirmed by the Appellate Authority.<\/p>\n
       2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the bonafide<\/p>\n
need pleaded is not genuine and the approach made by the authorities below<\/p>\n
is totally erroneous. It is submitted that the landlord sought eviction of the<\/p>\n
rooms in question for starting business for his son Haris who is conducting<\/p>\n
a cool bar in one of the rooms in the very same building. The said room is<\/p>\n
sufficient for the purpose of conducting the super market which is proposed<\/p>\n
to be opened by the son. It is also pointed out that already a room is<\/p>\n
available in the second floor which remained vacant and in the absence of<\/p>\n
any special reasons pleaded by the landlord, the eviction ordered cannot be<\/p>\n
RCRNos.113
\n& 114\/2008                            -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
supported. It is further contended that the respective tenants had provided<\/p>\n
amounts towards security deposits to the previous landlord and if those<\/p>\n
deposits are adjusted, there will not be any arrears of rent also.<\/p>\n
       3. The short facts leading to the dispute are necessary to be stated to<\/p>\n
appreciate the said contentions.      The averments in R.C.R.No.114\/2008<\/p>\n
shows that the tenants obtained the schedule room on lease from the<\/p>\n
predecessor-in-interest of the landlord on 18.3.1992. The assignment in<\/p>\n
favour of the present landlord is by document dated 4.12.1994 and the<\/p>\n
tenants have been paying rent to the respondent herein. The rent was<\/p>\n
enhanced from July 2000. The building in question consists of basement<\/p>\n
floor, ground floor and two mores stories. One of the sons of the landlord<\/p>\n
Shri Haris is occupying room No.18\/2A in the ground floor where he is<\/p>\n
conducting a cool bar. The schedule room is numbered as 18\/2C which is<\/p>\n
near to the room in the possession of the son. The room is required for<\/p>\n
starting a super market and the room that is already in the possession of the<\/p>\n
son is not sufficient for the said purpose. The adjoining room, viz. room<\/p>\n
No.18\/2B in the possession of other tenants is also required for the purpose<\/p>\n
of the business and for which R.C.P.No.35\/2004 has been filed. The son<\/p>\n
has the facility of a godown in the basement floor for storing the<\/p>\n
RCRNos.113
\n& 114\/2008                            -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
commodities of the super market. No other rooms are in the possession of<\/p>\n
the landlord or his son.\n<\/p>\n
       4. The tenants contended that they had paid a sum of Rs.1,25,000\/- to<\/p>\n
the predecessor-in-interest for the construction of the room on condition that<\/p>\n
it would be returned on vacating the room. The bonafide need pleaded is<\/p>\n
not genuine, especially since he is already conducting a cool bar and it was<\/p>\n
further contended that the tenants are depending on the income derived<\/p>\n
from the optical business they are conducting in the petition schedule<\/p>\n
building, for their livelihood.\n<\/p>\n
       5. The tenants in R.C.R.No.113\/2008 are occupying one of the rooms<\/p>\n
in the ground floor where they are conducting the business of repair and sale<\/p>\n
of watches.    They have advanced an amount of Rs.1,10,000\/- for the<\/p>\n
purpose of construction of the building.\n<\/p>\n
       6. We will now consider the main ground raised by the learned<\/p>\n
counsel for the petitioners regarding the genuineness of the bonafide need.<\/p>\n
The bonafide need pleaded is to start a super market by one of the sons of<\/p>\n
the landlord, namely, Haris. It is clear from the evidence that even though<\/p>\n
he is conducting a business in cool bar, that business is not progressing and<\/p>\n
therefore he wants to stop the same and to start a super market. He was<\/p>\n
RCRNos.113
\n& 114\/2008                            -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
examined as P.W.1 and has stated in detail the requirement of the schedule<\/p>\n
buildings to start a super market. One of the points raised by the petitioners<\/p>\n
is that his father, the landlord has not been examined.         The Appellate<\/p>\n
Authority rejected the said contention relying upon the decision of the Apex<\/p>\n
Court in Rangubhayi v. Hajayimmal Gokulchand (AIR 1999 SC 3089)<\/p>\n
and the decisions of this court in Subaida v. Krishnan (1986 KLT 663) and<\/p>\n
Lakshmi v. Labhakunju Ameer Hamsa<\/a> (2005 (3) KLT 627), taking the<\/p>\n
view that it is not the requirement of the law that the landlord must enter the<\/p>\n
box to support his case and this is a matter to be proved by cogent evidence<\/p>\n
and the court has to objectively assess the same in the light of the pleadings<\/p>\n
and the evidence adduced. Therefore, the contention on that aspect cannot<\/p>\n
be sustained and we reject it.\n<\/p>\n
       7. The other point raised is that there is a vacant room available with<\/p>\n
the landlord in the third floor and no special reasons have been pointed out.<\/p>\n
Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the said room is in the<\/p>\n
third floor and the same has been set apart for the requirement of his brother<\/p>\n
who is proposing to conduct a business in textiles by getting eviction of the<\/p>\n
tenanted premises involved in the connected case, viz. R.C.R.No.116\/2008<\/p>\n
along with this room and the requirement of that room has been specifically<\/p>\n
RCRNos.113
\n& 114\/2008                           -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
pleaded in the said case. Apart from that, here P.W.1 is proposing to<\/p>\n
conduct a business in super market in the ground floor and therefore it can<\/p>\n
be easily presumed that the room in the third floor will not be of any use<\/p>\n
for him to conduct a business in the ground floor. P.W.1 has also explained<\/p>\n
that a super market can be profitably conducted only in the ground floor<\/p>\n
which explanation is a very reasonable and acceptable one. Therefore,<\/p>\n
viewed in that manner, it cannot be said that the bonafide need pleaded is<\/p>\n
not genuine.\n<\/p>\n
      8. As regards the contention that the tenants are depending upon the<\/p>\n
income from the business for their livelihood, there was no evidence and<\/p>\n
therefore that contention was rejected. As regards the second limb of the<\/p>\n
proviso, the landlord had produced Ext.X1 certified copy of the building tax<\/p>\n
assessment register of Vadakara Municipality which shows the availability<\/p>\n
of vacant rooms in     Ward No.18 of the said Municipality in which the<\/p>\n
petition schedule building is also situated. No contra evidence has been<\/p>\n
adduced by the tenant. Primarily, it is for the tenants to establish by clear<\/p>\n
evidence that no suitable rooms are available in the locality and that burden<\/p>\n
has also not been discharged. In these circumstances, the tenants were<\/p>\n
found not eligible for the benefit of the second proviso to Section 11(3) of<\/p>\n
RCRNos.113
\n& 114\/2008                            -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
the Act. We do not see any reason to interfere with the said finding.<\/p>\n
      9. As far as the ground raised under Section 11(2)(b) of the Act is<\/p>\n
concerned, both the authorities have found that the rent is in arrears and the<\/p>\n
tenants are entitled to be evicted on that ground also. In fact, learned<\/p>\n
counsel for the petitioners contended that if the advance amount paid is<\/p>\n
adjusted towards rent, then there will not be any arrears. It was submitted<\/p>\n
by the learned counsel for the landlord that the said amount cannot be<\/p>\n
adjusted and it will be returned when the tenants vacate the building and the<\/p>\n
key is handed over. We find that the argument raised by the learned counsel<\/p>\n
for the petitioners on that score is also not correct. In R.C.A. No.26\/2007<\/p>\n
which is the subject matter of R.C.R.No.114\/2008, there is a clear finding<\/p>\n
by the Appellate Authority and by the Rent Control Court that the rent<\/p>\n
remained in arrears. In R.C.A.No.27\/2008 which is the subject matter of<\/p>\n
R.C.R.No.113\/2008 also, the finding is in favour of the landlord. We have<\/p>\n
already held that the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners<\/p>\n
regarding the adjustment of the security amount cannot be accepted.<\/p>\n
Therefore, there is no error in the finding that the ground under Section 11<\/p>\n
(2)(b) of the Act has been established. We find no merit in the revisions<\/p>\n
petitions and the same are dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
RCRNos.113
\n& 114\/2008                            -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
      10. In regard to the plea that the security amount has to be adjusted,<\/p>\n
learned counsel for the landlord fairly submitted that at the time of vacating<\/p>\n
the building, the landlord is prepared to pay back the same to the tenants<\/p>\n
and we record the same. If there is any arrears of rent remaining to be paid,<\/p>\n
the landlord will be entitled to adjust the said arrears from out of the<\/p>\n
security amount and return the balance amount to the tenants when they<\/p>\n
vacate the building.\n<\/p>\n
      In the facts and circumstances of the case, we grant three months time<\/p>\n
from today to the petitioners to vacate the premises on condition that they<\/p>\n
file an undertaking in the form of an affidavit before the Rent Control Court<\/p>\n
undertaking to vacate the premises unconditionally on or before the expiry<\/p>\n
of three months from today and also to deposit the arrears of rent, if any,<\/p>\n
due within three weeks from today and continue to pay the monthly rent till<\/p>\n
the premises are vacated. The affidavit shall be filed within the above said<\/p>\n
period of three weeks from today. The petitioners shall continue to pay an<\/p>\n
amount equivalent to the rent payable, towards compensation for use<\/p>\n
and occupation, till possession is surrendered. If any of the conditions<\/p>\n
RCRNos.113
\n& 114\/2008                           -8-<\/span><\/p>\n
aforesaid is violated, then the order of eviction will become enforceable at<\/p>\n
once.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                          ( P.R.Raman, Judge.)<\/p>\n
                                    (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)<\/p>\n
kav\/<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court K.Ascar Ali vs V.P.Yusuf on 19 August, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RCRev..No. 114 of 2008() 1. K.ASCAR ALI, AGED 40 YRS, S\/O.UMMERKUTTY … Petitioner 2. MANU, AGED 67 YRS, W\/O.UMMERKUTTY, 3. MASHOOD, S\/O.UMMERKUTTY, SAIKRIPA, 4. SUBAIDA, D\/O.UMMERKUTTY, SAIKRIPA, 5. SHAHANAVAS, S\/O.UMMERKUTTY,SAIKRIA, 6. SAFEERA, S\/O.UMMERKUTTY, SAIKRIPA, Vs 1. […]<\/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-184146","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nK.Ascar Ali vs V.P.Yusuf on 19 August, 2008 - 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\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"K.Ascar Ali vs V.P.Yusuf on 19 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-08-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-09-01T18:37:05+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\\\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"K.Ascar Ali vs V.P.Yusuf on 19 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-09-01T18:37:05+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1638,\"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\\\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008\",\"name\":\"K.Ascar Ali vs V.P.Yusuf on 19 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-09-01T18:37:05+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"K.Ascar Ali vs V.P.Yusuf on 19 August, 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":"K.Ascar Ali vs V.P.Yusuf on 19 August, 2008 - 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\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"K.Ascar Ali vs V.P.Yusuf on 19 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-09-01T18:37:05+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\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"K.Ascar Ali vs V.P.Yusuf on 19 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-09-01T18:37:05+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008"},"wordCount":1638,"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\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008","name":"K.Ascar Ali vs V.P.Yusuf on 19 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-09-01T18:37:05+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-ascar-ali-vs-v-p-yusuf-on-19-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"K.Ascar Ali vs V.P.Yusuf on 19 August, 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\/184146","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=184146"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/184146\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=184146"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=184146"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=184146"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}