{"id":191024,"date":"2006-02-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-01-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006"},"modified":"2018-05-01T09:06:38","modified_gmt":"2018-05-01T03:36:38","slug":"sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006","title":{"rendered":"Sudalayandi vs The Executive Officer on 1 February, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Sudalayandi vs The Executive Officer on 1 February, 2006<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS           \n\nDATED: 01\/02\/2006  \n\nCoram \n\nTHE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN         \n\nC.R.P.(NPD)No.608 of 2003  \nand \nC.M.P.No.6518 of 2003  \n\n\nSudalayandi                            ... Petitioner\n\n-Vs-\n\n1. The Executive Officer,\n   Sthlalasayana Perumal Thirukoil\n   Mahabalipuram.\n\n2. The District Collector,\n   Kancheepuram. \n\n3. The District Revenue Officer,\n   Kancheepuram. \n\n4. The Revenue Divisional Officer,\n   Chengalpattu.\n\n5. The Tahsildar,\n   Thirukalukundram Taluk Office,\n   Thirukalukundram.                         ... Respondents\n\n        Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of The Constitution of India\nto set aside the Order dated 22.01.2003 and made in OS.SR 1189 of 2002 on  the \nfile of Principal Sub Court, Chengalpattu.\n\n\n!For petitioner :  Mr.N.A.Nissar Ahmed\n\n^For R1         :  Mr.V.Raghavachari\nFor R2-R5       :  M\/s.Dakshayani, AGP\n\n:O R D E R \n<\/pre>\n<p>                It  is  stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner, that<br \/>\nwhen the suit papers were presented before the sub Court, Chengalpattu, it was<br \/>\nreturned by the Court on 22.01.2003 with the following endorsement:<br \/>\n&#8220;22.01.2003 Returned :  The Honourable High Court,  Madras,  has  directed  in<br \/>\nW.P.33663\/2002  dated  20.09.2002 that &#8220;if the petitioners are so advised they<br \/>\ncan seek declaration of title by amending the prayer in the suit in O.S.104\/88<br \/>\non the file of District  Munsif  Court  Thirukalukundram  or  work  out  their<br \/>\nappropriate reliefs independently&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>        In  this  plaint the relief is for declaring the plaintiffs title over<br \/>\nthe suit property and for consequential permanent injunction.  In the reply of<br \/>\nthe return, dated  07.01.2003,  it  has  been  stated  as  this  suit  is  for<br \/>\ndeclaration  of  title  and for possession which is not in accordance with the<br \/>\nplaint prayer.  The plaint prayer does not comply with the  direction  of  the<br \/>\nHonourable High  Court, Madras.  When the plaint prayer is for declaration and<br \/>\nfor injunction the original plaint has to be amended as per the directions  of<br \/>\nthe Honourable High Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>        Hence  the  plaint  is  returned  with  a direction to comply with the<br \/>\norders of the Honourable High Court, Madras.\n<\/p>\n<p>        Time Two Weeks.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.      The learned counsel for the  plaintiff  in  the  suit  made  a<br \/>\ndetailed  endorsement  while representing the papers on 07.01.2003 which is as<br \/>\nfollows :\n<\/p>\n<p>        &#8220;It is submitted that as per the Honourable High Court  of  Judicature<br \/>\nof Chennai,  the  plaintiff has two options.  1st option is &#8220;in para 4 that if<br \/>\nthe plaintiffs are so advised they can seek declaration of title  by  amending<br \/>\nthe  prayer  in  the  lower  court  bare  injunction  suit  or  work out their<br \/>\nappropriate relief independently&#8221; and second option is in the  result  of  the<br \/>\nwrit  petition  &#8220;the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right<br \/>\nof the petitioners  to  work  out  their  rights  with  regard  to  title  and<br \/>\npossession  over  the suit property in an appropriate civil proceedings before<br \/>\nthe competent civil court.\n<\/p>\n<p>Hence the plaintiff as chosen the second option to file a suit for declaration<br \/>\nof title and possession.\n<\/p>\n<p>        It is submitted that  there  is  no  question  of  resjudicata.    The<br \/>\nresjudicata comes  only the matter or relief was tried by the Court.  Here the<br \/>\nrelief is different, parties are changed between bare injunction suit and  the<br \/>\nsuit.  It is submitted that the lower court bare injunction suit was dismissed<br \/>\nfor  default  hence  there  is  no  question  was  resjuidcata and further the<br \/>\nplaintiff has assured in the suit he will withdraw the lower court suit  after<br \/>\nnumbering the  above  suit.  Hence the question of resjudicata does not arise.<br \/>\nIt is submitted that if as per your order  the  plaintiffs  are  amending  the<br \/>\nlower  court  it  is  very  difficult  to amend the not only the prayer but he<br \/>\nshould amend from the cause title to prayer including all  the  paragraphs  in<br \/>\nthe  suit  because  the  lower  court suit is bare injunction but this suit is<br \/>\ndeclaration of title and for possession.\n<\/p>\n<p>        It is therefore prayed that this Honourable High court may be  pleased<br \/>\nto number the suit urgently because of in lower court bare injunction suit was<br \/>\ndismissed for default and further the 1st defendant at any time may evict with<br \/>\ntheir  power  influence and their men along with their higher officials if the<br \/>\nsuit is not numbered the plaintiff will be evicted  immediately  or  otherwise<br \/>\nsuitable orders may be passed.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.      Inspite  of  that,  the  learned  Principal  Judge  passed the<br \/>\nimpugned order on 22.01.2003 returning the plaint with the direction to comply<br \/>\nwith the orders of this Court granting two weeks time for compliance.\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.      It has been  pointed  out  by  the  learned  counsel  for  the<br \/>\npetitioner  as  well  as  the counsel for the respondent that the High court&#8217;s<br \/>\ndirection is found in para 4 of the order, dated 20.09.2002, in W.P.No.33  663<br \/>\nof 2002 and it reads as follows :\n<\/p>\n<p>        &#8220;In  the  instant  case,  admittedly the petitioners have filed a suit<br \/>\nO.S.No.105 of 1998 before the learned District Munsif, Thirukalukundram, for a<br \/>\nbare injunction.  If the petitioners are so advised, they can seek declaration<br \/>\nof title by amending the prayer in the said suit or work out their appropriate<br \/>\nreliefs independently.  In any event in view of the ratio laid by  this  Court<br \/>\nin <a href=\"\/doc\/227563\/\">KUPPUSWAMI  NAINAR  v.  THE DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER<\/a> reported in 1995(1)MLJ<br \/>\n426, it may not be proper for this Court to go into such dispute  between  the<br \/>\npetitioners  and  the  fifth  respondent  either with regard to their title or<br \/>\npossession.\n<\/p>\n<p>        In the result the writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to  the<br \/>\nright  of  the  petitioner  to  work out their rights with regard to title and<br \/>\npossession over the suit property in an appropriate civil  proceedings  before<br \/>\nthe  competent  civil court, within eight weeks from today and till then there<br \/>\nshall be an order of status quo.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.      On hearing the  arguments  of  the  learned  counsel  for  the<br \/>\npetitioner  as well as the respondents and on a perusal of the documents filed<br \/>\nin support of Civil Revision Petition, this Court finds it appropriate to  set<br \/>\naside  the  order  passed  by  Learned  Principal  Sub  Judge, Chengalpattu on<br \/>\n22.01.2003, returning the plaint to comply with the orders of this Court,  and<br \/>\nto  direct  the petitioner to re-present the plaint before the District Munsif<br \/>\nCourt,  Thirukalukundram,  with  all  the  necessary  papers   and   on   such<br \/>\nre-presentation, the learned District Munsif, Thirukalukundram, is directed to<\/p>\n<p>take appropriate steps to hear the suit following the procedure established by<br \/>\nlaw  and  dispose  of  the same within a period of six months from the date of<br \/>\nreceipt of a copy of this order.\n<\/p>\n<p>        6.      At this stage, the learned counsel for the  petitioner,  prays<br \/>\nfor return  of the original plaint which has been filed before this Court.  It<br \/>\nis ordered that the original plaint be returned to the learned counsel for the<br \/>\npetitioner to comply with the directions made in this order.\n<\/p>\n<p>        7.      The learned counsel for the  respondent  points  out  that  in<br \/>\nParas  5 and 11 of the plaint filed in OS.SR.No.1189 of 2002, the reference to<br \/>\nthe direction of the High Court to file a suit may be appropriately amended.\n<\/p>\n<p>        8.      With the above directions,  the  Civil  Revision  Petition  is<br \/>\nallowed.  Consequently,  connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.  No<br \/>\nCosts.\n<\/p>\n<p>svki<\/p>\n<p>Index :  Yes<br \/>\nInternet :  Yes<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Sudalayandi vs The Executive Officer on 1 February, 2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 01\/02\/2006 Coram THE HON&#8217;BLE Mr.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN C.R.P.(NPD)No.608 of 2003 and C.M.P.No.6518 of 2003 Sudalayandi &#8230; Petitioner -Vs- 1. The Executive Officer, Sthlalasayana Perumal Thirukoil Mahabalipuram. 2. The District Collector, Kancheepuram. 3. The District Revenue [&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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-191024","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Sudalayandi vs The Executive Officer on 1 February, 2006 - 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\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sudalayandi vs The Executive Officer on 1 February, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006\" \/>\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=\"2006-01-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-01T03:36:38+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\\\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sudalayandi vs The Executive Officer on 1 February, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-01-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-01T03:36:38+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006\"},\"wordCount\":1050,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006\",\"name\":\"Sudalayandi vs The Executive Officer on 1 February, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-01-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-01T03:36:38+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sudalayandi vs The Executive Officer on 1 February, 2006\"}]},{\"@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":"Sudalayandi vs The Executive Officer on 1 February, 2006 - 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\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sudalayandi vs The Executive Officer on 1 February, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-01-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-01T03:36:38+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\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sudalayandi vs The Executive Officer on 1 February, 2006","datePublished":"2006-01-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-01T03:36:38+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006"},"wordCount":1050,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006","name":"Sudalayandi vs The Executive Officer on 1 February, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-01-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-01T03:36:38+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudalayandi-vs-the-executive-officer-on-1-february-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sudalayandi vs The Executive Officer on 1 February, 2006"}]},{"@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\/191024","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=191024"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/191024\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=191024"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=191024"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=191024"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}