{"id":197949,"date":"2009-09-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-09-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009"},"modified":"2018-06-01T09:34:30","modified_gmt":"2018-06-01T04:04:30","slug":"sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009","title":{"rendered":"Sri Ramaiah vs Sri C Sreenivas on 14 September, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Sri Ramaiah vs Sri C Sreenivas on 14 September, 2009<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: K.Sreedhar Rao H.Billappa<\/div>\n<pre> \n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\n\nDATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF SEPTEMBER.2@3fj9.._\n\nPRESENT\n\nTHE I-ION'BLE Mr.JUsT1cE_RAQ 1'  k\n\nAND  .  _   \nTHE HON'BLE Mr..;IJsT1CEH..B1LLA;?\u00a7&gt;A\"  \n\n\"REGULAR FIRST  N0.\u20ac\u00a7.O.?t'_\u00e900ES\n\nBETWEEN:\n\n1.\n\nSri Ramaiah, V.\nSince dead by LR \n\nSrnt.G0?iAIram:f1'\u00e9--V._ ,  \"  V.\nW\/0 1ate~v..Ran1g1ah,_   ~\nAged '.\":1l.}.)'O1Vi\u00a7,\" 58\"};'ears.A \nResgdent of}\/I.e.ngaia_Warpef.,\nChanna4patna;ATaluk\"'and\nRajnanagaram District.\" '\n\n. Srci N. R.1\\'4\/fovcv1d'a1\u00a2?3Lg1.ifi1 dowda,\n\no VS\"r1  .\n\nV Agecf 30 years.\n\nA 8\/0 SI'1fRama1ah,\n\nAgedgabvdut 28 years.\n\n.Tsri.'R.\u20ac3o 1,\n 'S10 Sn\n'  -Aged about 27 years.\n\namalah,\n\n    are resldents of\n\" Mangalwarpet,\nChannapatna--571 501.\n\n. . APPELLANTS\n\n(Sri K.N.Vejnkatesh, Adv.)\n\n\u00abV\n\n\n\nAND:\n\nSri C.Sreenivas,\n\nS \/ 0 Late Chikkavenkategowda,\nAged about 51 years,\nMangalwarpet,\n\nLakshmi Venkateshwara Toys,\n\nBanga1ore--571 50 1.    \n\n(Sri B.T.Indushekar, Adv.)\n\nThis RFA is \ufb01led under'SeVc'tion 96.i\u00a2t'11c'od\u00e9; ofVVCivi1 A\n\nProcedure against the judgmjentkand 'decree dated\n11.11.2005 passed in '.015-Ni).1_48[89'~--on the file of the\nAddl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dr1.'),-Rarnl. Lragajram, decreeing the\nsuit for speci\ufb01c perfor1ngr1'cg_ I 1   __ \n\nThis   hearing this day,\n V-J: deiiyeVred\"ti1ye feilowing:\n\n \"\"\"    T\nThe that the respondent\n\nentered  Vagrecyrnent for sale of the suit schedule\n\n  vide AAVEXV;-P-1'; The terms of the agreement\n\n the property measures 15 guntas in\n\n of Mangalwarpet Village, Channapatna\n\n _The sale consideration agreed is at Rs.36,000\/--\n\n  g\"'1vtper_'.g:unta and that a sum of Rs.30,000\/-- was paid as\n\n'Vi...\/dm_advance on the date of Ex.P1, the balance was\n\nit stipulated to be paid within three months' from the date\n\nof EXP} and to obtain the registered sale deed. The\n\n\u00a26\/\n\n\n\nplaintiff also submits in the piaint that the sister--inwlaw\n\nof the first appellant had set up rival claim \n\nwas revenue proceeding pending before \n\nCommissioner. The plaintiff subr_I_1its__  the  \n\npendency of the revenue proe:eecii'rigs liifbefore if \n\nAssistant Commissioner, first\" Vdefen.dAant'-\u00bbV..h--ad\n\nreceived a sum of Rs.3Q__.Q00\/ furtheljadivance.\nIt is after the terrninatioliillof  before the\nAssistant  notice. The\ndefendants   suit is filed for\n\nspecific peir'forn;.anlc'e \"\n\n2. Theyfdiefendants\"?;:lt'o'. 4, per contra, denied the\n\nV executgionyof VtheV_V_p\"agreement at EXP} and receipt of\n\n \"\u00ab.._Alternatively, it is contended that the\n\nplaifihtiff with the terms of Ex.Pl. Hence\n\n. a legal noticefwas issued immediately after the expiry of\n\nif stipulated time in EX.P1 revoking the agreement. it\n\n.jIisZ\"~stated that plaintiff was not ready and Willing to\n\n\"efppelrform his part of the contract. The suit property is a\n\njoint family property. The first defendant has no right to\n\n'I\n\n\n\nunilaterally bind the other members of the family who\n\nhave equal right in the property.\n\n3. The first defendant has filed a separate...wrfitteri if   T \n\nstatement and has denied the \n\nsubsequent to EX.PI, It is siibmittedtlliat \n\nis a joint family property  property\navailable to the family   Hiindue\nin\ufb02uence and coeplfpciorl.   on a\nblank paper.  papers have\nbeen concocted for sale which is\n\nEXP}.\n\n4. _Thellfp.1ai11tif'f e;=:arrIined himself and two other\n\n'TV-vri.tnessles;\u00bb_ancl marked\"? documents. The first defendant\n\ne:::.a1'r1irie.d'yhirrlsself and examined one witness and\n\nT   marlieud on. behalf 10 documents. The trial court on\n\n basis o_f3~the evidence has found that the plaintiff has\n\n lithe agreement and also that he was ever ready\n\n  to perform his part of the contract. The suit\n\n  the plaintiff is decreed as prayed for. The defendants\n\nare in appeal.\n\n4:'\n\n\n\n5. Learned counsel for the defendants\/appellants\n\nsubmits that the finding of the triai Court that {the\n\nplaintiff was ever ready and willing to perform   \n\nof the contract is contrary to the evidences_yo_n-,i\"ecoi;d. if \n\nThe defendants 2 to 4 immediately after_; \n\ntime mentioned in Ex.Pl issued a 1e'gal\"notice'lV'l~at\n\nintimating the breach on the    and\nalso that the agreement  \"admitted in the\n\n EXP'? is\n\nevidence of the first defenc1antV--.\nreceived and no3._.;re}'\u00a711y to .' ' \n6. :\"\"~Ifhel_  Ex.P7 has alternative\n\nc0ntenti_ons.llEr1 thefirs't_'pl~ace, the execution of EX.Pl is\n\ndenied_:.5l'i'lt:,,yis also stated that the plaintiff has failed to\n\n \"of consideration as stipulated within\n\n--   three ._.r4:irVl1oriVth--s\".\u20ac-'V. 'Hence, the agreement was revoked. The\n\n-._l.\/'.fj;j'\u00abplaintiff \"has not given any reply to the notice. The\n\n  would show that the plaintiff was not ready\n\n  lwilling to perform his part of the contract.\n\n7. The counsel for the defendants\/appellants\n\nsubmitted that the defendants have adduced evidence\n\n\n\n6\n\nto show that plaintiff deals in real estate and he had no\n\nreal intention of purchasing the property for hiniself.\n\nThe property is the only source of livelihoodw_t'ol:lg\"tlie~l2,\n\nfamily. The decree of specific performance *\n\nharshly against the appellants andmthcir  \n\ncounsel; for the appellants further  that' the'\n\nis filed just three days prior  period of \nwhich only shows thattijie pl'ainti;\"flVllh-ad nollllbonafide\nintention of purchase. If relalllly  about the\n\nagreement, he W~0Ulg_(l_'haV:'e  tl\"ie\"si1ii.t.'.I1T1:uch earlier.\n\n8. 'A the pleadings and the\n\nevidence disclose' tha't.:'th:erelJwas dispute between the\n\ndefendant ,No.l  sister--in~law with regard to the\n\n  respect of the land in question. An\n\n  pending before the Assistant\n\nV Co1nrni'ssiolne1'.\":'l'he plaintiff\/ respondent has stated that\n\nafter the termination of the proceedings before the\n\n Assistfant Commissioner he issued notice calling upon\n\n'*.the\"'defendants to execute the sale. It is also in the\n\n evidence of the plaintiff that subsequent to Ex.P1\n\nfurther advance of Rs.30,000\/- was paid to defendant\n\nV\n\n\n\n-....4p-\n\nNo.1. P.W--2, Rajagopal is the witness who testifies the\n\npayment of Rs.30,000\/e under Ex.P2. P.W--3 is the\n\nscribe of Ex.Pl. in fact, in the defence, the defendants\n\ndo not seriously dispute the execution   \nHowever, it is contended that the said \n\nobtained by coercion and undue  is .'\n\ncircumstances set up as ,\u00bb&lt;ie_fence&#039;A_Vhave ;&#039;noVt.__bee&#039;\u00a7n ll\n\nestablished. _\n9. The contention&quot;&#039;w~._that :_the,_V_.agreementlA stood\nrevoked under Ex.VP7 issued  to 4 does\n\nnot appear toh&#039;e&#039;ga__tena!jle.,._contention. It is admitted\n\nthat with rega1*d  the  entries, a dispute was\n\nendin\u00e9i before ti1elAssistant Commissioner. It is uite\n\n that when the mutation entries in\n\nRelcorhctyytof&#039;  tgslvffare seriously disputed, it cannot be\n\n V expected thatllfllthe plaintiff should pay the money and\nathelsale deed, when the dispute is pending in the\n  Court. It is the settled position in law that\n\n&quot; a contract relates to sale of immovable property, it\n\nis normally presumed that the time is not the essence of\n\ncontract, unless, the party setting up the plea that time\n\n\n\nis the essence of contract, should specificaliy establish\n\nthat the time was agreed to be the essence of a con.t._racCti..__\nin the instant case, there is no such evidence _\nthat the party specifically agreed that. time was heitizie  .4\n\nessence of contract. The E3x.P1 \n\ndefendants. Further the &#039;advance of .  C\n\nalthough received by de.fendant.:CCii\u00a7&#039;o,iriinder&#039; will\nnot affect the rights of any manner.\nThe defendants iltlto\u00e9     is of no\nconsequence&#039;   party to EXP}\nand   th&#039;cVr-property. Since there\nwas a   before the Assistant\n\nCommissioner, &#039;afte&#039;r thefvtermination of the proceeding\n\n the  has issuedvthe notice seeking registration of\n\n\u00b0s_ai&#039;e ideed&#039;; C ~ \n\n contention that E3x.P&#039;7 revoked the\n\n C:cor1&#039;t1=actVat Ex..P1 is untenabie. When it is proved that a\nW&#039;-&#039;revefniie dispute is pending before the Court, it cannot\n\n said that the defendants were ready and willing to\n\nperform this contract. It is after the termination of the\n\nproceedings before the Assistant. Commissioner legal\n\nJ0\/ \n\n\n\nhassles for executing the contract. gets cleared. The\n\nplaintiff, &#039;after the termination of proceedings before the\n\nAssistant Commissioner in favour of defendant \n\nhas issued legal notice and thereafter \ufb01led  \n\nwhen there was no reply from the defendants.-~\u00bb if.  \n\nIn the totality of the \n\nabove it cannot be said that gjllaiiiztiff  I&#039;1\u20ac)VtlVI&#039;.:t3&amp;VV1&quot;&lt;;:ij&#039;f&#039;\u00a3&#039;:&#039;t&#039;i&#039;1V:C1\nwilling to perform his part.&#039; of  and that\u00a7there\nwas termination of Contraet_&#039;under:&#039;   -In that View\n\nof the matter.  .dAeereeV&#039;oi?&#039;the trial Court\n\nis sound\ufb01and prope.r_.V.% \n\n;uRpea1\u00a7hsn\ufb01s\u00a7e\ufb01;:&quot;=d&quot;\u00a3\n\n .....  \n<\/pre>\n<p>TUDGE<\/p>\n<p>Sd\/-3<br \/>\nJUDGE<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Karnataka High Court Sri Ramaiah vs Sri C Sreenivas on 14 September, 2009 Author: K.Sreedhar Rao H.Billappa IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF SEPTEMBER.2@3fj9.._ PRESENT THE I-ION&#8217;BLE Mr.JUsT1cE_RAQ 1&#8242; k AND . _ THE HON&#8217;BLE Mr..;IJsT1CEH..B1LLA;?\u00a7&gt;A&#8221; &#8220;REGULAR FIRST N0.\u20ac\u00a7.O.?t&#8217;_\u00e900ES BETWEEN: 1. Sri Ramaiah, V. Since dead by [&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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-197949","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Sri Ramaiah vs Sri C Sreenivas on 14 September, 2009 - 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\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri Ramaiah vs Sri C Sreenivas on 14 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-09-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-01T04:04:30+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=\"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\\\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri Ramaiah vs Sri C Sreenivas on 14 September, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-01T04:04:30+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009\"},\"wordCount\":29,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009\",\"name\":\"Sri Ramaiah vs Sri C Sreenivas on 14 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-01T04:04:30+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri Ramaiah vs Sri C Sreenivas on 14 September, 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":"Sri Ramaiah vs Sri C Sreenivas on 14 September, 2009 - 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\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri Ramaiah vs Sri C Sreenivas on 14 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-09-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-01T04:04:30+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri Ramaiah vs Sri C Sreenivas on 14 September, 2009","datePublished":"2009-09-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-01T04:04:30+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009"},"wordCount":29,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009","name":"Sri Ramaiah vs Sri C Sreenivas on 14 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-09-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-01T04:04:30+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramaiah-vs-sri-c-sreenivas-on-14-september-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri Ramaiah vs Sri C Sreenivas on 14 September, 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\/197949","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=197949"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/197949\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=197949"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=197949"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=197949"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}