{"id":19364,"date":"2007-02-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-02-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007"},"modified":"2016-02-22T13:08:30","modified_gmt":"2016-02-22T07:38:30","slug":"valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007","title":{"rendered":"Valayankandan Moosa vs Mullan Madayan Veeran Haji on 21 February, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Valayankandan Moosa vs Mullan Madayan Veeran Haji on 21 February, 2007<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nFAO No. 272 of 2006()\n\n\n1. VALAYANKANDAN MOOSA, S\/O.MOIDEEN HAJI,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. MULLAN MADAYAN VEERAN HAJI,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.K.MADHAVAN UNNI\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.SAJU.S.A\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN\n\n Dated :21\/02\/2007\n\n O R D E R\n            KURIAN JOSEPH &amp; K.T.SANKARAN,JJ.\n\n                    -----------------------------------------\n\n                          F.A.O.No.272  of  2006\n\n                    -----------------------------------------\n\n              Dated this the 21st  day of  February, 2007\n\n\n                                JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>Sankaran, J.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>      The   defendant   in   O.S.No.106\/2000   on   the   file   of   the   Sub<\/p>\n<p>Court, Manjeri, whose application under Order IX Rule 13 of the<\/p>\n<p>Code of Civil Procedure was dismissed by the court below, is the<\/p>\n<p>appellant  herein.   The suit was filed by the respondent herein for<\/p>\n<p>realisation of money on the basis of an agreement.   The execution<\/p>\n<p>of   the   agreement   was   disputed   by   the   appellant.     The   document<\/p>\n<p>was   sent   to   the   expert   for   comparison   of   the   signature   of   the<\/p>\n<p>appellant  with   his  admitted   signature.    The   expert   found  that  the<\/p>\n<p>disputed   signature   tallies   with   the   admitted   signature   of   the<\/p>\n<p>appellant.   Thereafter the case was posted for trial.   The appellant<\/p>\n<p>remained ex parte and the court below passed an ex parte decree on<\/p>\n<p>28-9-2004.     I.A.No.1793\/2004   was   filed   by   the   appellant   for<\/p>\n<p>setting aside the ex parte decree and that application was allowed<\/p>\n<p>FAO NO.272\/2006<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                          -:2:-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>on   3-1-2006.     The   case   was   taken   up   for   trial.     The   chief<\/p>\n<p>examination   of   the   plaintiff   was   completed   and     his   cross-<\/p>\n<p>examination   was   commenced.     During   the   cross-examination   of<\/p>\n<p>P.W.1 the parties suggested a settlement that if the plaintiff takes<\/p>\n<p>oath in a particular mosque at Calicut that he had paid the amount<\/p>\n<p>to the defendant, the suit could be decreed.  Though the Oaths Act<\/p>\n<p>is not in force and though a decree could not be passed only on the<\/p>\n<p>basis of oath, since the  parties entered  into  a compromise in  that<\/p>\n<p>way the court below was inclined to allow that request and directed<\/p>\n<p>the  parties   to  take   recourse   to  oath.     The   terms  of   the   oath   were<\/p>\n<p>settled and they were agreed upon by the defendant.  However, on<\/p>\n<p>the date fixed for taking oath the defendant did not turn up before<\/p>\n<p>the   Mosque   and   the   settlement   could   not   be   worked   out.<\/p>\n<p>Thereafter   when   the   case   was   taken   up   for   further   cross-<\/p>\n<p>examination   of   P.W.1,   the   defendant   did   not   appear.     The   court<\/p>\n<p>below   had   no   other   option   but   to   pass   a   decree   in   favour   of   the<\/p>\n<p>plaintiff.     I.A.No.345\/2006   was   filed   by   the   appellant   under<\/p>\n<p>FAO NO.272\/2006<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         -:3:-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure to set aside the ex<\/p>\n<p>parte decree.   He put forward a case that from 23-1-2006 to 26-2-<\/p>\n<p>2006   he   was   laid   up   and   he   produced   a   certificate   issued   by   a<\/p>\n<p>doctor.       However, the doctor who issued the certificate was not<\/p>\n<p>examined.  The court below took note of the fact that the evidence<\/p>\n<p>of P.W1 would indicate that the doctor advised him to meet after<\/p>\n<p>15  days and on the third visit the certificate was issued.   But the<\/p>\n<p>certificate  is seen  issued   on  23-1-2006.   This does  not  tally  with<\/p>\n<p>the evidence adduced by P.W1.  All the facts and circumstances of<\/p>\n<p>the case were considered by the court below and it was found  that<\/p>\n<p>there   was   no   bona   fides   with   regard   to   the   reasons   stated   in   the<\/p>\n<p>petition in respect of the non-appearance of the defendant on 28-1-<\/p>\n<p>2004   and   hence   the   court   below   was   not   inclined   to   allow   the<\/p>\n<p>application.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>       2.     Learned   counsel   for   the   appellant   submits   that   a   last<\/p>\n<p>chance   may  be   afforded   to   the   appellant   to   put   forward   his   case<\/p>\n<p>and   that   he   has   serious   contentions   to   urge   in   the   suit.     Learned<\/p>\n<p>FAO NO.272\/2006<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         -:4:-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>counsel for the respondent, however, contended that the attempt of<\/p>\n<p>the appellant is only to protract the proceedings  and  to  delay the<\/p>\n<p>disposal of the suit.  We are not impressed with the contentions put<\/p>\n<p>forward   by   the   appellant   and   we   do   not   also   feel   that   the   court<\/p>\n<p>below   was   not   fully   justified   in   dismissing   the   application.<\/p>\n<p>However,  taking  note   of  the  facts  and  circumstances  of  the  case,<\/p>\n<p>we   are   of   the   view   that   an   opportunity   can   be   afforded   to   the<\/p>\n<p>appellant to appear before the court to cross-examine P.W.1 and to<\/p>\n<p>adduce   further   evidence,   on   condition   that   the   appellant   shall<\/p>\n<p>deposit 50% of the plaint claim within a period of one month from<\/p>\n<p>today   and   shall   also   pay   a   sum   of   Rs.5,000\/-   as   costs   to   the<\/p>\n<p>respondent within the aforesaid period of one month and also pay<\/p>\n<p>Rs.5,000\/- as costs to the District Legal Service Authority, Manjeri<\/p>\n<p>within   one   month.     If   the   appellant   fails   to   comply   with   any   of<\/p>\n<p>these   conditions,   the   appeal   shall   stand   dismissed   and   the   order<\/p>\n<p>passed by the court below shall stand confirmed.   If the appellant<\/p>\n<p>complies   with   all   the   conditions   mentioned   above,   the   order   in<\/p>\n<p>FAO NO.272\/2006<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                       -:5:-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>I.A.No.345\/2006   shall   stand   set   aside   and   the   appellant   shall   be<\/p>\n<p>entitled to appear before the court and to proceed with the case.  In<\/p>\n<p>such a situation,  the court below shall dispose of the suit within a<\/p>\n<p>period of three months thereafter.   It is made clear that no further<\/p>\n<p>adjournment at the request of the defendant shall be granted by the<\/p>\n<p>court below.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>        The appeal is allowed as above.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>                                        (KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE)<\/p>\n<p>                                        (K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE)<\/p>\n<p>ahg.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Valayankandan Moosa vs Mullan Madayan Veeran Haji on 21 February, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM FAO No. 272 of 2006() 1. VALAYANKANDAN MOOSA, S\/O.MOIDEEN HAJI, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. MULLAN MADAYAN VEERAN HAJI, &#8230; Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.A.K.MADHAVAN UNNI For Respondent :SRI.SAJU.S.A The Hon&#8217;ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH [&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-19364","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>Valayankandan Moosa vs Mullan Madayan Veeran Haji on 21 February, 2007 - 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\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Valayankandan Moosa vs Mullan Madayan Veeran Haji on 21 February, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-02-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-02-22T07:38:30+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Valayankandan Moosa vs Mullan Madayan Veeran Haji on 21 February, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-02-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-22T07:38:30+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007\"},\"wordCount\":841,\"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\\\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007\",\"name\":\"Valayankandan Moosa vs Mullan Madayan Veeran Haji on 21 February, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-02-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-22T07:38:30+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Valayankandan Moosa vs Mullan Madayan Veeran Haji on 21 February, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"Valayankandan Moosa vs Mullan Madayan Veeran Haji on 21 February, 2007 - 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\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Valayankandan Moosa vs Mullan Madayan Veeran Haji on 21 February, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-02-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-02-22T07:38:30+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Valayankandan Moosa vs Mullan Madayan Veeran Haji on 21 February, 2007","datePublished":"2007-02-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-22T07:38:30+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007"},"wordCount":841,"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\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007","name":"Valayankandan Moosa vs Mullan Madayan Veeran Haji on 21 February, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-02-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-22T07:38:30+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/valayankandan-moosa-vs-mullan-madayan-veeran-haji-on-21-february-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Valayankandan Moosa vs Mullan Madayan Veeran Haji on 21 February, 2007"}]},{"@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\/19364","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=19364"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19364\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19364"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19364"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19364"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}