{"id":190381,"date":"2010-07-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-07-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010"},"modified":"2016-02-10T08:11:32","modified_gmt":"2016-02-10T02:41:32","slug":"mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010","title":{"rendered":"Mariyamma George vs District Superintendent Of &#8230; on 15 July, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Mariyamma George vs District Superintendent Of &#8230; on 15 July, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 6833 of 2010(D)\n\n\n1. MARIYAMMA GEORGE, W\/O. K.GEORGE,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,\n\n3. DAMODHARAN PILLAI K.N.,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.RAJENDRAN\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.P.SREEKUMAR\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS\n\n Dated :15\/07\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                           K. M. JOSEPH &amp;\n                  M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.\n               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                  W.P.(C).No. 6833 of 2010 D\n               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n              Dated this the 15th day of July, 2010\n\n                              JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>Joseph, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition for a direction to<\/p>\n<p>respondents 1 and 2 to give adequate                    and effective police<\/p>\n<p>protection to the life of the petitioner and her husband from the<\/p>\n<p>third respondent and protection for the construction of the<\/p>\n<p>compound wall at the boundary of the third respondent in<\/p>\n<p>continuation of the existing compound wall at the expense of<\/p>\n<p>the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>      2.   Briefly the case of the petitioner is as follows.<\/p>\n<p>Petitioner is a retired school teacher.              Her husband is also a<\/p>\n<p>retired school teacher. They alone are living in their house. The<\/p>\n<p>third respondent is their close neighbour. The properties of the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner and the third respondent are lying adjacent to each<\/p>\n<p>W.P.(C).No. 6833 of 2010<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                     2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>other. The third respondent constructed a shop building at the edge of<\/p>\n<p>the boundary separating the two properties.    The third respondent cut<\/p>\n<p>and removed the      branches of the trees, which are hanging to the<\/p>\n<p>property of the third respondent, without obtaining the consent of the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner and her husband. The third respondent closed the way of the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner to get into the road.\n<\/p>\n<p>      3.    On 3.8.2009       the third respondent and his henchmen<\/p>\n<p>trespassed into the property of the petitioner and started to plaster the<\/p>\n<p>building of the third respondent. When the petitioner and her husband<\/p>\n<p>objected,   the third respondent abused them and tried to beat the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner. There is a further allegation of an incident, which is<\/p>\n<p>alleged to have taken place on 15.8.2009.     The petitioner filed W.P.<\/p>\n<p>(C) 24823 of 2009. In the said writ petition there was a conciliation<\/p>\n<p>conference, wherein the disputes were settled amicably. True copy of<\/p>\n<p>judgment in th said writ petition is Ext.P1, the relevant portion of<\/p>\n<p>which reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>W.P.(C).No. 6833 of 2010<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                   3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>               &#8221; In the process of conciliation the parties have<\/p>\n<p>        agreed that the construction of the compound wall<\/p>\n<p>        will be completed at the expenses of the petitioner. It<\/p>\n<p>        is also submitted that the petitioner will not cause any<\/p>\n<p>        obstruction for plastering of the existing compound<\/p>\n<p>        wall.    We direct the petitioner to complete the<\/p>\n<p>        construction within six months.       We hope that the<\/p>\n<p>        parties will continue to strengthen their healthy<\/p>\n<p>        relationship which they have resumed today and they<\/p>\n<p>        should be the model neighbours for the entire people<\/p>\n<p>        of the locality.     In view of th settlement of the<\/p>\n<p>        disputes as above, we are of the view that it is not<\/p>\n<p>        necessary for the parties to continue any further<\/p>\n<p>        litigation in this regard. Hence, in order to secure the<\/p>\n<p>        ends of justice, the criminal proceedings are also to be<\/p>\n<p>        pout an end to.          Accordingly we quash the<\/p>\n<p>        proceedings in FIR 884\/09 on the file of Kundara<\/p>\n<p>        Police Station.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>      4. Petitioner had attempted to complete the compound wall as<\/p>\n<p>directed by this Court. But the third respondent objected the same.<\/p>\n<p>W.P.(C).No. 6833 of 2010<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                   4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>The petitioner and the third respondent did not comply with the<\/p>\n<p>direction of this Court.      Later third respondent constructed    a<\/p>\n<p>compound wall and shop building at the western extremity of his<\/p>\n<p>boundary.     The remaining portion      extending from the partly<\/p>\n<p>constructed compound wall is to be completed. As per the terms of the<\/p>\n<p>agreement it has to be done by the petitioner. It means that the<\/p>\n<p>remaining portion of the compound wall has to be constructed in<\/p>\n<p>continuation of the existing compound wall at the boundary of the<\/p>\n<p>property of the third respondent touching the boundary of the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner   at the expense of the petitioner.   It is seen that  the<\/p>\n<p>agreement was that the respondent would get a compound wall<\/p>\n<p>constructed without incurring any expense and for the money being<\/p>\n<p>spent by the petitioner she should would get a compound wall without<\/p>\n<p>the loss of the property at the boundary of her property. Against this<\/p>\n<p>agreement, the third respondent obstructed the construction. Hence<\/p>\n<p>W.P.(C).No. 6833 of 2010<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                     5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>the petitioner filed Contempt Petition, C.O.C. 106 of 2010, which was<\/p>\n<p>disposed of as follows:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>              &#8220;If the petitioner could not comply with the<\/p>\n<p>        direction as contained in the judgment, his remedy is<\/p>\n<p>        to approach the court for necessary                 police<\/p>\n<p>        protection and not to file a contempt application<\/p>\n<p>        since the direction issued is against himself.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>      5. A counter affidavit is filed by the third respondent producing<\/p>\n<p>Exts. R3(a) to R3(i), wherein it is stated, inter alia, as follows.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>             &#8220;8. It is mot respectfully submitted that the<\/p>\n<p>       intention of the petitioner&#8217;s son is to harass me and<\/p>\n<p>       they are using their parents as a shield and filing<\/p>\n<p>       cases against me by raising baseless allegations. The<\/p>\n<p>       petitioner&#8217;s sons want an illegal gain by constructing<\/p>\n<p>       compound wall in my property. It is also very clear<\/p>\n<p>       from paragraph 10 of the writ petition.            I never<\/p>\n<p>       threatened the petitioner or her men in any occasion.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>W.P.(C).No. 6833 of 2010<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                    6<\/span><\/p>\n<p>       This Hon&#8217;be Court quashed Ext.R3(g) FIR on the<\/p>\n<p>       basis of the assurance given by the petitioner that she<\/p>\n<p>       will plaster the demolished portions of the plaster of<\/p>\n<p>       the wall of the shop room. Believing the words of the<\/p>\n<p>       petitioner and her sons I did not file any review<\/p>\n<p>       against Ext.P3 judgment with due respect to this<\/p>\n<p>       Hon&#8217;ble Court.      In the meantime the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>       cheated the 3rd respondent and escaped from criminal<\/p>\n<p>       liability.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>      6.  No reply affidavit    as such was filed.     The parties were<\/p>\n<p>referred for a mediation on 3.6.2010, but the matter was not settled.<\/p>\n<p>      7. We heard learned counsel for the parties. Admittedly the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner obtained Ext.P1 judgment, wherein it i stated, inter alia, that<\/p>\n<p>the parties have agreed that the construction of the compound wall will<\/p>\n<p>be done at the expense of the petitioner and the petitioner will not<\/p>\n<p>cause any obstruction to the existing compound wall. The petitioner<\/p>\n<p>was directed to construct the compound wall within six months. On the<\/p>\n<p>one hand the case of the petitioner is that as the expenses is to be borne<\/p>\n<p>W.P.(C).No. 6833 of 2010<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                   7<\/span><\/p>\n<p>by the petitioner, the compound wall is to be constructed         in the<\/p>\n<p>property of the respondent. Learned counsel for the third respondent<\/p>\n<p>submits that there was no such agreement.\n<\/p>\n<p>      8. In the nature of the disputes, it will be appropriate for us to<\/p>\n<p>direct the official respondents to give protection to the petitioner as<\/p>\n<p>sought for.   We make it clear that the parties are free to approach<\/p>\n<p>appropriate forum seeking appropriate orders.<\/p>\n<p>                                         (K. M. JOSEPH)<br \/>\n                                                Judge<\/p>\n<p>                                   (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS)<br \/>\n                                               Judge<br \/>\ntm<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Mariyamma George vs District Superintendent Of &#8230; on 15 July, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 6833 of 2010(D) 1. MARIYAMMA GEORGE, W\/O. K.GEORGE, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, &#8230; Respondent 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, 3. DAMODHARAN PILLAI K.N., For Petitioner :SRI.C.RAJENDRAN For [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-190381","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Mariyamma George vs District Superintendent Of ... on 15 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mariyamma George vs District Superintendent Of ... on 15 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-02-10T02:41:32+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mariyamma George vs District Superintendent Of &#8230; on 15 July, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-10T02:41:32+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1074,\"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\\\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010\",\"name\":\"Mariyamma George vs District Superintendent Of ... on 15 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-10T02:41:32+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mariyamma George vs District Superintendent Of &#8230; on 15 July, 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":"Mariyamma George vs District Superintendent Of ... on 15 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mariyamma George vs District Superintendent Of ... on 15 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-02-10T02:41:32+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mariyamma George vs District Superintendent Of &#8230; on 15 July, 2010","datePublished":"2010-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-10T02:41:32+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010"},"wordCount":1074,"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\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010","name":"Mariyamma George vs District Superintendent Of ... on 15 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-10T02:41:32+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mariyamma-george-vs-district-superintendent-of-on-15-july-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mariyamma George vs District Superintendent Of &#8230; on 15 July, 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\/190381","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=190381"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/190381\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=190381"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=190381"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=190381"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}