{"id":203255,"date":"2009-03-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009"},"modified":"2017-01-12T01:54:29","modified_gmt":"2017-01-11T20:24:29","slug":"smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"Smt Jabeen Taj vs Sri Habibulla Shariff on 19 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Smt Jabeen Taj vs Sri Habibulla Shariff on 19 March, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: C.R.Kumaraswamy<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\n\nDATED THES THE 19% DAY OF MARCH 2009\nBEFORE\n\nTHE HoN'aLE MR. JUSTICE C.R. !<UE'!lARA5~V:\\*;'AF'li:A7:{:'.':.o:E"  \n\nE'\/l.F.A. NO. 11165\/200-8"'('CPlQ)7_;  A  \nBETWEEN:   A  A\n\nSmt. Jabeen Taj\n\nW\/o S.H. Ashraf\n\nAgeo 36 years\nNo.1815, III Block\n10"' Cross, Hllal Nagar\nI-*l.B.R. Layout \n\nBangalore ~;"5A5U' Exile A\n   '  Appellant\n(By Sri: ._SeshV"a gnf'r*Vi:_  Advocate)\n\nAil;\n\nski;mbarballaayShaA%:rf\nS\/o Jaanaab Abd"u_lIa.'.a'V-..-V"\n\n 61. years  \n l\\lo,_49, T'h--.imr_halah Road\n\n  rljeayyngyyalore -- 5360 051\n\nHxRespondent<\/pre>\n
   Sri: G.S. Shrlkanteswaran, Advocate)<\/p>\n
U<\/p>\n
This MFA is filed under Order 43 rule 1(r) off”CgPC,
\nagainst the Order dated 12\/11\/2008 passed on {A E’\\io;v.1″j–a’rid<\/p>\n
2 in O.S.No. 6075\/2008 on the file of >< Adlaiiitiiofmgirll511;!'~-
\nCivil Judge, Bangalore, CCH-40, allowing IA i\\lo';'1-rfirleidiiiund\u00e9fr
\nOrder 39 Rule 1 & 2 crc for 7.1. and::di'sjrni.ssi_ng.:
\nfiled under Order 39 Rule 4 of CPC ford\/Aa'c_ating:_i:_he*order"of'–..g<\/p>\n
Temporary injunction.\n<\/p>\n
This Miscellaneous Fsrs’t._ onulior Hearing
\nthis day, the Court delivered the ‘foii:lowgi~n:ig<\/p>\n
T  in <\/p>\n
This  filed under Order–43
\nRule W 1(r) vicivil  against the order dated
\n12.11.2008. g%pais’sea\u00bbior17  Nos.1 and 2 in o.s.
\n  of 39*” Add!. City Civil 3udge,<\/p>\n
BangiaiVVor’erC:CkiVf4igyyrallowlng LA. No.1 filed under Order–39<\/p>\n
i”vv:.Ai”Fi’uies 1″”\u00ab..anr;i” of CPC for Temporary Injunction and<\/p>\n
 ILA: No.2 filed under Order~39 Rule~4 of CPC for<\/p>\n
 order of Temporary Injunction,<\/p>\n
\u00a32′<\/p>\n
property, pursuant to a registered GPA conferred uponhim<\/p>\n
by the original owner of the Band comprised in 2<\/p>\n
of Kachakaranahaily. After obtaining the possess:i.on’_t.’oii” <\/p>\n
scheduie property, he constructed <\/p>\n
same during the year 1984 and_ieased”*t_he sanfie one’; <\/p>\n
Alla Baksh.\n<\/p>\n
(4.2) Plaintiff has timer.ia.is:a[:e.a..[gthat originaiiy
\nSy.l\\io.14O of Kachari<..:a'nahiaEEyi 4:acres 27 guntas<\/p>\n
stood in the narin4es,."ol5"iVl\/_s: S*hf.aAn'b__h:ogv–.gKaiyanasundaram and
\nR.V. Nanjuridaiah.Vivivefj-iri'is:'p-ri:ri~ci'pai as per the GPA dated
\n3.3.1983 and uthe afo'r'esa_id~.'\u00a7'txtent of land was notified for<\/p>\n
a:_<:(,t~Liyi_sitiQ_r*.<eCuted""%in favour by one Srnt. Lakshmamma with<\/p>\n
_r_r'.jifVesp'eCt to Site No.158 of HER layout 1" stage, 15'<\/p>\n
 handed over the katha certi\ufb01cate, extract,<\/p>\n
"rli'\u00a2:'en_s_er\u00a7 and the sale deed executed by BDA in favour of<\/p>\n
2\/<\/p>\n
Lakshmamrna with respect to the aforesaid site. He<\/p>\n
contended that the schedule property is <\/p>\n
allotted to the defendant's vendor and she <\/p>\n
upon the same. Though he <\/p>\n
doing any such act by appraising' her  <\/p>\n
the declaration suit filed by h'i:n'i.V'.v:again1'st– 'l_VV:B_'t3A':]in o.s.
\nNo.7546\/2002, the defend*a..n't_'d\u00e9.i:d to  request
\nmade by him to stoizvtvbe c.o'i"istt't:cti.o2\u00bbn_it-lence he was
\nleft with no    indulgence of
\nthe Court  "for.VVi_n3unctive relief against
\nthe defendant.'*   facie case and further
\nconsidering  of construction of the
\n  the balance of convenience also<\/p>\n
lieskin the injunctive relief. If for any<\/p>\n
iifiieasonlthe in.te'ri'\u00a7{:ni'; relief sought for him were to be refused<\/p>\n
'4–l\u00abl'.jby.__'t-he CoLrt* and in the event the defendant were to<\/p>\n
any structure, not only the suit filed by him would<\/p>\n
 infructuous but he will be put into such irreparable<\/p>\n
2\/<\/p>\n
loss and injury which cannot be compensated in terms of<\/p>\n
money.\n<\/p>\n
(5) The defendant has filed an <\/p>\n
Order-39 Rule~4 of CPC. In support:vollVth’at.v appiiecatiqnV ,rtij\u00e9;<\/p>\n
defendant has sworn to an affidaex\/_it asun’d\u00bber:<\/p>\n
(6) He stated that he is the”‘a.:t:’5solutl.e’olfvnehaf ofytlhlellsuit 2<\/p>\n
schedule property having .pu..ifcha”sed th_e’l”‘s.a’me ‘undler a sale
\ndeed dated 16.2.2004 from The said<\/p>\n
sale deed has be\u00e9’|’i;~_iil”egl::3te\u20ac’:ea .::ti\u00a7eiv–o’?fice of the Sub-<\/p>\n
Registrar,   The said Lakshmamma
\nacquired title utioxdthevls_ui’t.V”pr’operty on 3.9.2002 from the
\n   beAfore—-~-executing the absolute sale deed in<\/p>\n
favVo=ur’iofil.,a’-l{shfh..a’r3<jma, on 21.4.2002 Lakshmamma was<\/p>\n
 in"p_o%sses.s\u00a7oh'i:;of the property by issuing possession<\/p>\n
"–2\u00ab2..certif\u00bbi.cAate. "  the basis of the sale deed dated 162.2004,<\/p>\n
A',42"-sneyrhasacquired absolute title to the property and she is in<\/p>\n
"iiVayv\u00a7ti.l_.possession of the suit schedule property. She stated<\/p>\n
W<\/p>\n
that in the month of jiune 2008, the Local Authority<\/p>\n
sanctioned the plan and issued licence <\/p>\n
construction on the suit scheduie property.  iii}?<\/p>\n
she started to put up construction?ofii:.tiie"\u00ab__suit-iis'c,h.e'd'ui_e:'<\/p>\n
property. Though the plaintiff has no\u00e9'i'.i_gi".t, <\/p>\n
over the suit schedule property,'V'xh.Ve: .Vhas"'ajo:p'roal:c;hed the
\nCourt for an order of  obtained an
\ninterim order at  as if he has
\ngot a right in   property. On
\nthe basis of.the""ii.n'te*1::-;i:rgu   interfering with
\nher origoinlg'  that the Court has
\ngranted an orde.rio.f she should not proceed
\n stated that if the interim order<\/p>\n
 by the Court below is not vacated,<\/p>\n
:7jf\u00ab..then  to hardship and injustice. On the<\/p>\n
-i_.l’_jC\u00bb-O.ntr.ary, i’f.,V__Athe interim order of injunction granted is<\/p>\n
 be vacated, then no hardship or injustice wouid<\/p>\n
‘Vcb’eica_L.ased to the case of the other side.<\/p>\n
[L\/’<\/p>\n
(7) The sum and substance of the finding of they-Court<\/p>\n
below is that plaintiff has filed a suit against <\/p>\n
o.s. NO.7S46\/2002 for the relief of declaration’-..:to~[declare<\/p>\n
that he has perfected his title over the schgedL3ge’1<\/p>\n
adverse possession. The sealed su.i_t”‘– is for\ufb01<\/p>\n
adjudication. Therefore he isv’vi4en:tit_iVed iiforjiiajn order of
\nTemporary Injunction.\n<\/p>\n
(8) The lear;,..ett..;ci3un\u00a7gelgfor t’hAe”i’a_’p.p.eVlE’a’nt submitted as<\/p>\n
under:\n<\/p>\n
The    purchased from one
\nLakshrnammau . The “rS’ai4ci*\u00ab-._’:ivi;a’l<shmamma is the originai
\naiiottee Qsftfze  Vi:'Jo.14O\/2 was an acquired land by<\/p>\n
  \ufb01iaintiff has no concern over the property in<\/p>\n
 questioAr\u00a7.~,–.Vi' VV'lE\u00e9V\u00a7<'_eep;t"Vone GPA, he has no other document to<\/p>\n
 that  owner of the property. The defendant —<\/p>\n
 got the original sale deed issued by the BDA,<\/p>\n
 'VffP_osses;sion Certificate issued by the BDA and the sale deed<\/p>\n
V'riiV4j_"rie_itecuted by Lakshniamma is in favour of the appellant.<\/p>\n
2\/_<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
She is also having khatha certificate issued by theftocal<\/p>\n
Authority. She has also got upto date tax <\/p>\n
Appeliant has also obtained sanctioned <\/p>\n
from the competent authorities to  <\/p>\n
the suit schedule property. T,he__.doc’ur.n’ents <\/p>\n
the appellant clearly shows that  owner of
\nthe property in question. V l
\n(9) Learned counsel  rVeAs.po’n’d’e:’it”submitted that<\/p>\n
respondent hasygiot suit schedule<\/p>\n
property. ItHishistfcont:e:nt.i:o’n.’_’vthathey is in possession of the
\nsuit schedule’ ‘his contention that he is in
\nsettled poisseessionthie property in question. He has filed<\/p>\n
aieuyiiitiii o;s.y*l\u00ab..iyo.7si45\/2002 to declare that he has<\/p>\n
 perfecte-dyyhis:’t_iv_t_l__e’T;W Way of adverse possession. The said<\/p>\n
Kzsuit is pe’ndi”no’i5efore the Court below. Learned counsel<\/p>\n
.1  respovndent relied on the decision of this Court in the<\/p>\n
  ‘john 8. James .vs. BDA and another reported in ILR<\/p>\n
lK”iiy~~i.2o\u00a3ioiKAR. 4134.\n<\/p>\n
lb’<\/p>\n
(10) I have carefully perused the decision citedl.Vbyi_”t_he<\/p>\n
iearned counsei for the respondent. In my <\/p>\n
ruling cited by the learned counsei for,.t.he resp’o”i’id_e.n’t’iisnot <\/p>\n
applicable to the instant case.\n<\/p>\n
(11) Normally white  th3eVVVVVCourt
\nbelow has to examine  facie case
\nand whether irreparable  appellant
\nand balance of case, it is the
\ncase of that he has purchased the
\nsite in questioni”f.ro’rn?:oVnVe’..vLatinshmarnma, who is the originai
\na_iiott_ee   —– -\u00abit is also undisputed fact that the<\/p>\n
site”‘xi__n” acquired vide preliminary notification<\/p>\n
:7s”~d’ated and the final notification dated 9.1.1985<\/p>\n
_…’_favri\u00abd”Bt)A h”ais__A’3passed an award on 9.3.1987 and possession<\/p>\n
Twas drawn on 14.8.1987. These things have<\/p>\n
“ibe:e~n…..icleariy stated in the affidavit of the plaintiff.<\/p>\n
f””\u00ab.;T”herefore the trial Court has not examined these aspects as<\/p>\n
{if<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
to who was the owner of the land in question at the time of<\/p>\n
considering the application for grant of injunction,….__”Et,tis”‘th’e,.<\/p>\n
contention of the learned counsel for the <\/p>\n
respondent is in settied possession.\n<\/p>\n
respondent, original owners ofthe landviiare <\/p>\n
Kalyaraasundaram and R.V. Na4r’.V;”iV’u:1d’aia<'h'*  iivfghe has
\nobtained GPA on  _   of the
\nTransfer of Property'.\/Act,  an act
\nby which a living   in present or in
\nfuture, to persons, or to himself,
\nand one  "persons and 'to transfer
\nproperty' is  act. Such being the case,
\nV}l'i'th_Q'Ut  saliedeied executed, GPA will not transfer<\/p>\n
 '.f"a.:yVo.ur of the GPA holder. He only acts on<\/p>\n
Gl\ufb01behalf'0_f"lthe.'pr.incipal. The learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
-4_i,i’.ji5i’iL’.p’e-lllant\/defendant submitted that the award amount has<\/p>\n
‘F.4:’=be–e:nV’._rec_eix\/ed by the original owner. It is the contention of<\/p>\n
‘the..r.es\u00a7ppndent\/plaintiff that the BDA demolished the small<\/p>\n
V<\/p>\n
13<\/span><\/p>\n
shed existed in the schedule property. But in__ the<\/p>\n
averrnents of the plaintiff, it has been clearly statevd:’j\u00ab\u00ab.t:E’:’a’t<\/p>\n
the BDA has drawn a possession rnahazar <\/p>\n
Such being the case, the contention-of’ the learnedj_cou..n,sel..g<\/p>\n
for the respondent\/plaintiff that <\/p>\n
possession of the suit schedui’erig:.V””‘property_’ to’<\/p>\n
accept. The trial Court hasoveir’l’o’o.E{‘ecl”i’this asipect of the
\nmatter and it has not considered  to who was
\nin possession of t”h’e;.s’uitgiscberdule Eventhough<\/p>\n
the acquisition not\u00a7:r;_ir;a.tio’n  i:s’sued\u00a7 Way back in the year<\/p>\n
1978, the:”suit’fer’:l’a\u00a7i-\u00bbyer.s’e–possession was filed in 2002,<\/p>\n
after neariy 24u”y.earsg.x’  <\/p>\n
 In  case, the trial Court has also not<\/p>\n
  relating to irreparable injury that is<\/p>\n
V”v”:.caLised to”theigappellant\/defendant. The appellant\/defendant<\/p>\n
.:  the property from the originai aiiottee of the<\/p>\n
 tmh\u00e9 year 2004 and ‘he has also arranged funds for<\/p>\n
hatZfjucgonstvruction of the building in the suit schedule property.<\/p>\n
22’<\/p>\n
14<\/span><\/p>\n
Therefore the baiance of convenience is in favour of the<\/p>\n
defendant and she stiii suffers from more injury <\/p>\n
(13) Even the acquisition notification hasy’::’aiso:’iioeehrir”<\/p>\n
not challenged by the plaintiff. in the”s’ui–t,, ‘the  it<\/p>\n
been made a party. The piaintiffih__a:s_fV_no <\/p>\n
property in question has been \u00e9i”ccj’uired ‘b.y_’th”e  sway V<\/p>\n
back in the year 1978. Tiler_efore”tga-ionjgi’~into accotint of all
\naspects of the case and theVV_n*ia_te..r_iValVfs  record, the<\/p>\n
piaintiff has not  :\u00e9:ny’_prirn’aj:Vfa.c’ive—case.<\/p>\n
(14)  Court in the matter of
\ninjunction is”ratheri,_.circun3~~scri’bed. The \u00e9ippeiiate Court
\nwould be\ufb01siogw to V-.int’e’rfer’e i\/with the exercise of discretion<\/p>\n
a’iiNW0u’fi’d  not be justified in interfering with the<\/p>\n
 exerc’ise~f’.__o.fl”d:i’scre.t’id’n under Appeal soiely on the ground<\/p>\n
v7?1_tha.t if itis c.’–onsi”dered at the triai stage, it may have come<\/p>\n
;”cio.ntrary conciusion. If the discretion has been<\/p>\n
f\/F,<\/p>\n
15<\/span><\/p>\n
exercised by the trial Court reasonably and in a judicial<\/p>\n
manner, the fact that the appellate Court would havvehliltaiten<\/p>\n
a different view may not justify interference <\/p>\n
Court’s exercise of discretion. If it app,e_a_rs to’th=e7jap’pe’llVate4 “‘<\/p>\n
Court that in exercising its discretion,  trial<\/p>\n
acted unreasonably or capriciously or ,hasVl’.iVgnor’edthe”‘<\/p>\n
relevant facts, then it would xc-ert”a–in”ly__ be'”op.e.n’\u00a7 to the
\nappellate Court to interfere”‘wi_th exercise of<\/p>\n
discretion.\n<\/p>\n
(15)   lens examine whether in
\nthe instant case ithe’v._t\u00abr’;i:a’l  has acted reasonably or
\nnot ? The “aspect ‘rellhatingf to acquisition of the land by the<\/p>\n
  and taking possession on 14.8.1987<\/p>\n
 has notibyeie\ufb01:”‘g_x__a’n\ufb01l’ned by the trial Court. The defendant<\/p>\n
Vl\ufb02uhash  the property from one Lakshmamma who is<\/p>\n
,j.=the”..forigi–nyal Hallottee. This aspect has also not been<\/p>\n
 by the trial Court. Even the balance of<\/p>\n
V’Jj”~.convenience between the plaintiff and the defendant has<\/p>\n
ex<\/p>\n
16<\/span><\/p>\n
not been property examined giving a finding to that effect.<\/p>\n
The finding of the triai Court to the effect that <\/p>\n
filed by the piaintiff for adverse posses.S_i,o_n..VVinf<\/p>\n
7546\/2002 is pending, the piaintiff  <\/p>\n
may riot be proper and it is not’ on the.sound.\u00bb’p’rin:;i.Vpie\u00a7s<\/p>\n
iaw. The trial Court has  un’reaf_S’\u00a9’navbEy and
\ncapriciousiy. Therefore tVh’e.CTorAd’er2.passevd:’py the triai Court
\nis to be set aside and the”‘inj:unVc’t.iQ.n’  by the triai<\/p>\n
Court deserves to he    f V<\/p>\n
(16)  fv’_if’e’yv_..oyffi.:the;”‘~a_bo_veuHidiscussion, I pass the<\/p>\n
foiiowing:\n<\/p>\n
 First Appeai is aiiowed.\n<\/p>\n
 2. Th’e._app!iVCa”t~i_vo_n’AV~f.:;fiied under Order-39 Ruies \u00bb\u00bb 1 and 2 of<\/p>\n
 cm: mio,s; i\\io.A6O7S\/_2O08 is rejected.<\/p>\n
.1 appiioation fiied under Order~39 Ruie–4 of CPC in<\/p>\n
‘_’_Q.S..V’F\\3o’.6O7S\/2008 is aiiowed.<\/p>\n
6\/\/g<\/p>\n
3’3;\n<\/p>\n
17<\/span><\/p>\n
4. The interim order of injunctien granted by the triaEfC–.ourt
\nis vacated.   ‘V<\/p>\n
    V e<\/p>\n
Gss\/–<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Smt Jabeen Taj vs Sri Habibulla Shariff on 19 March, 2009 Author: C.R.Kumaraswamy IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THES THE 19% DAY OF MARCH 2009 BEFORE THE HoN’aLE MR. JUSTICE C.R. !<UE'!lARA5~V:\\*;'AF'li:A7:{:'.':.o:E" E'\/l.F.A. NO. 11165\/200-8"'('CPlQ)7_; A BETWEEN: A A Smt. Jabeen Taj W\/o S.H. Ashraf Ageo 36 years […]<\/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-203255","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSmt Jabeen Taj vs Sri Habibulla Shariff on 19 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Smt Jabeen Taj vs Sri Habibulla Shariff on 19 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-03-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-11T20:24:29+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=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Smt Jabeen Taj vs Sri Habibulla Shariff on 19 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-11T20:24:29+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":2195,\"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\\\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009\",\"name\":\"Smt Jabeen Taj vs Sri Habibulla Shariff on 19 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-11T20:24:29+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Smt Jabeen Taj vs Sri Habibulla Shariff on 19 March, 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":"Smt Jabeen Taj vs Sri Habibulla Shariff on 19 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Smt Jabeen Taj vs Sri Habibulla Shariff on 19 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-11T20:24:29+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":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Smt Jabeen Taj vs Sri Habibulla Shariff on 19 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-11T20:24:29+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009"},"wordCount":2195,"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\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009","name":"Smt Jabeen Taj vs Sri Habibulla Shariff on 19 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-11T20:24:29+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-jabeen-taj-vs-sri-habibulla-shariff-on-19-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Smt Jabeen Taj vs Sri Habibulla Shariff on 19 March, 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\/203255","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=203255"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/203255\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=203255"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=203255"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=203255"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}