{"id":185695,"date":"2009-08-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-08-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009"},"modified":"2014-04-17T07:42:09","modified_gmt":"2014-04-17T02:12:09","slug":"c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009","title":{"rendered":"C.Rajan vs The Secretary on 10 August, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
C.Rajan vs The Secretary on 10 August, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRSA.No. 634 of 2009()\n\n\n1. C.RAJAN,S\/O.LATE KUNHIKRISHNAN NAIR,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE SECRETARY, KOYILANDY MUNICIPALITY,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. KOYILANDY MUNICIPAL COUNSEL,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.DILIP MOHAN\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID\n\n Dated :10\/08\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                             HARUN-UL-RASHID, J.\n                        ----------------------------------------\n                             R.S.A.No.634 of 2009\n                        ----------------------------------------\n                  Dated this the 10th day of August, 2009\n\n                                   JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
       The Second Appeal is directed against the the judgment and decree<\/p>\n
in A.S. 26\/2007 on the file of the Sub Court, Koyilandy which arises from<\/p>\n
the judgment and decree in O.S. No.151\/2006 on the file of the Munsiff<\/p>\n
Court, Koyilandy. The suit for injunction restraining the defendants, from<\/p>\n
evicting    the plaintiff forcefully from the premises belonging to 1st<\/p>\n
defendant-Municipality, was dismissed by the trial court and confirmed in<\/p>\n
appeal     Hence the Second Appeal. The parties hereinafter referred to as<\/p>\n
plaintiff and defendants as arrayed in the suit.\n<\/p>\n
        2.    The plaintiff is conducting a workshop making gold covering<\/p>\n
and silver ornaments in the plaint schedule room belonging to the 1st<\/p>\n
defendant-Municipality.      It is his case that the plaint schedule room<\/p>\n
developed leakage and parts of the concrete on the terrace started falling<\/p>\n
down and due to the repeated requests, ultimately, in the month of May<\/p>\n
2004 the 1st defendant-Municipality started repair works. Due to the said<\/p>\n
repair works the plaintiff had to partly close the business and shift the<\/p>\n
same to another building.        According to him, he had compelled to pay<\/p>\n
an amount of Rs.87,000\/- as rent to the other building for 29 months at the<\/p>\n
rate of Rs. 3,000\/- per month, that he had to incur expenses for shifting the<\/p>\n
materials and hence the loss caused to him is solely due to the wilful<\/p>\n
R.S.A. No. 634 of 2009                 -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
negligence and omission on the part of the Municipal Authorities to do the<\/p>\n
repair works in time. It is also submitted by the plaintiff that even though<\/p>\n
he approached the defendants for getting exemption from paying the rent<\/p>\n
for the period of 29 months during which period the plaint schedule room<\/p>\n
was under maintenance, his request fall in deaf ears. The 1st defendant-<\/p>\n
Municipality also issued a notice dated 29.9.2009 demanding the rent.<\/p>\n
       3.     In the written statement filed       by the defendants they<\/p>\n
contended that the plaintiff is not a tenant but only a licensee, that they<\/p>\n
put up an over head roof of          sheets for preventing the leakage, that<\/p>\n
nobody was directed to surrender the premises for the purpose of repair<\/p>\n
works and there was no need for the stoppage of business in the plaint<\/p>\n
schedule room due to the repair works . It is also contended by them that<\/p>\n
the plaintiff is not entitled to get any exemption from paying the rent and<\/p>\n
that the plaintiff   has defaulted      payment of rent for a long period.<\/p>\n
Therefore they       are constrained to issue a notice to        the plaintiff<\/p>\n
demanding the payment of rent. In order to avoid the payment of rent,<\/p>\n
the present suit was filed for injunction. They also contended that no<\/p>\n
attempt was made by them to evict the plaintiff by force.<\/p>\n
       4.     The evidence in this case consists of the oral testimony of<\/p>\n
PW1 and Exts.A1 and A2 on the side of the plaintiff. No evidence was<\/p>\n
adduced by the defendants.\n<\/p>\n
       5.     The trial court noticed the fact that even though the plaintiff<\/p>\n
R.S.A. No. 634 of 2009               -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
has stated that he is entitled to get an exemption of Rs. 87,000\/- i.e the<\/p>\n
amount he had paid for a period of 29 months at the rate of 3,000\/- per<\/p>\n
month to the other building, the only prayer in the suit is for an injunction<\/p>\n
and no relief is claimed by the plaintiff for realisation of the said amount<\/p>\n
which is alleged to be incurred due to the shifting of the materials and<\/p>\n
business. The trial court held   that there is no evidence to prove that he<\/p>\n
shifted his business to another building and he paid Rs. 3,000\/- per month<\/p>\n
as rent for 29 months.     At the same time the defendants contended that<\/p>\n
the building required minor repairs because of the leakage and they put up<\/p>\n
overhead roof sheets and thus the leakage is solved and that for the said<\/p>\n
purpose there is no need for the plaintiff to vacate the building .<\/p>\n
       6.     The trial court also considered the legality of Ext.A1 notice<\/p>\n
issued by the defendants directing the plaintiff to vacate the premises.<\/p>\n
Admittedly, the plaintiff is a defaulter of licence fee for a long period.<\/p>\n
Referring to Section 215 (8) of the Kerala Municipalities Act, the trial court<\/p>\n
held that if there is any default beyond the period for which deposit is<\/p>\n
made, it is mandatory on the part of the Secretary to demand the Licencee<\/p>\n
to remit the Licence fee together with such penalty or interest within 7 days<\/p>\n
of the service of such notice and in case of failure, the Secretary shall<\/p>\n
cause the premises to be closed down temporarily and the person or<\/p>\n
persons in occupation shall be got removed with the assistance of Police or<\/p>\n
otherwise.    In such circumstances the trial court held that the plaintiff is<\/p>\n
R.S.A. No. 634 of 2009                 -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
not entitled to get any reliefs as prayed for and dismissed the suit.<\/p>\n
       7.     In the appeal filed by the plaintiff the lower appellate court<\/p>\n
also re-appreciated and re-considered the questions raised by him and<\/p>\n
held that the findings arrived at by the trial court on facts, circumstances<\/p>\n
and evidence,       requires no interference.     The lower appellate court<\/p>\n
observed that there is no material to show that the plaint schedule room<\/p>\n
was in a dilapidated condition and that the plaintiff had suffered a huge<\/p>\n
loss and earnings because of the repair works and consequent shifting of<\/p>\n
the business to the other building. The lower appellate court also observed<\/p>\n
that there is no prayer for any compensation from the defendants for the<\/p>\n
loss sustained by him by the consequent shifting of the business to other<\/p>\n
building and     that the plaintiff has not brought out any material to show<\/p>\n
that he was unable to conduct the business in the plaint schedule room<\/p>\n
during the time when the repair was effected. The legality of Ext.A1 notice<\/p>\n
was also considered by the lower appellate court and held that Ext.A1<\/p>\n
notice is a valid notice issued under the circumstances stated in the written<\/p>\n
statement filed by the defendants.        Finally, the Lower appellate court<\/p>\n
agreed with the findings of the trial court and confirmed the same.<\/p>\n
       8.      The findings of the courts below are based on facts evidence<\/p>\n
and circumstances.      I   find that no    grounds    are made out by the<\/p>\n
plaintiff\/appellant to interfere with the findings of the courts below, by<\/p>\n
invoking    this Court’s jurisdiction under Section 100 of the C.P.C. No<\/p>\n
questions of law much less any substantial question of law arises for<\/p>\n
R.S.A. No. 634 of 2009                -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
consideration in this appeal. This appeal fails and dismissed in limine.<\/p>\n
       9.     The learned counsel for the plaintiff\/appellant submitted that<\/p>\n
the plaintiff is entitled to get exemption of rent for the period when the<\/p>\n
plaint schedule room         was under maintenance ,that the plaintiff is<\/p>\n
compelled to shift the business to other building for the reason that he was<\/p>\n
not in a position to carryout the business in the plaint schedule room since<\/p>\n
major repair works        were  going on there.     Even though the plaintiff<\/p>\n
approached the Municipal Authorities for getting exemption from paying<\/p>\n
the rent during the period when the plaint schedule room was under<\/p>\n
repair, the Municipal Authorities dismissed his petition in that regard. The<\/p>\n
counsel for the plaintiff\/appellant requested that the plaintiff      may be<\/p>\n
permitted to approach the Appellate Authority under the Municipalities Act<\/p>\n
to ventilate his grievances. In such circumstances this Court directs the<\/p>\n
Appellate Authority to consider the plaintiff’s statutory appeal if the plaintiff<\/p>\n
file the same within a period of one month from today and pass appropriate<\/p>\n
orders, as expeditiously as possible without considering the question of<\/p>\n
limitation in filing that appeal<\/p>\n
                                    (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE)
\nes.\n<\/p>\n
HARUN-UL-RASHID, J.\n<\/p>\n
 —————————\n<\/p>\n
R.S.A. No.634 of 2009\n<\/p>\n
—————————-\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
  10th August, 2009<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court C.Rajan vs The Secretary on 10 August, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RSA.No. 634 of 2009() 1. C.RAJAN,S\/O.LATE KUNHIKRISHNAN NAIR, … Petitioner Vs 1. THE SECRETARY, KOYILANDY MUNICIPALITY, … Respondent 2. KOYILANDY MUNICIPAL COUNSEL, For Petitioner :SRI.DILIP MOHAN For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon’ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID […]<\/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-185695","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nC.Rajan vs The Secretary on 10 August, 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\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"C.Rajan vs The Secretary on 10 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-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=\"2009-08-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-04-17T02:12:09+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\\\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"C.Rajan vs The Secretary on 10 August, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-04-17T02:12:09+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1302,\"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\\\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009\",\"name\":\"C.Rajan vs The Secretary on 10 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-04-17T02:12:09+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"C.Rajan vs The Secretary on 10 August, 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":"C.Rajan vs The Secretary on 10 August, 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\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"C.Rajan vs The Secretary on 10 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-08-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-04-17T02:12:09+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\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"C.Rajan vs The Secretary on 10 August, 2009","datePublished":"2009-08-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-04-17T02:12:09+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009"},"wordCount":1302,"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\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009","name":"C.Rajan vs The Secretary on 10 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-08-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-04-17T02:12:09+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-rajan-vs-the-secretary-on-10-august-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"C.Rajan vs The Secretary on 10 August, 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\/185695","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=185695"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/185695\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=185695"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=185695"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=185695"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}