{"id":203639,"date":"2005-02-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-02-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005"},"modified":"2015-02-05T12:40:41","modified_gmt":"2015-02-05T07:10:41","slug":"kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005","title":{"rendered":"Kamalambal vs Arulmigu Renuka Devi on 22 February, 2005"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Kamalambal vs Arulmigu Renuka Devi on 22 February, 2005<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n In the High Court of Judicature at Madras\n\nDated: 22\/02\/2005 \n\nCoram \n\nThe Honourable Mr.  Justice S.R.SINGHARAVELU     \n\nSecond Appeal No.1117 of 1994  \n\n1. Kamalambal  \n2. A.Jayapal                            ..Appellants\n\n-Vs-\n\nArulmigu Renuka Devi \nAmman Temple, Vijayapuram,   \nThiruvarur Taluk and Munsif,\nrep.by its Executive Officer                    ..Respondent\n\n        Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code  against\nthe  judgment  and  decree dated 30.06.1993 in A.S.No.8 of 1991 on the file of\nSub Court, Nagapattinam, reversing the judgment and decree dated 27.02.1990 in\nO.S.No.133 of 1988 on the file of District Munsif Court, Thiruvarur.\n\n!For Appellants :  Mr.B.Ramamoorthy \n\n^For Respondent :  Mr.T.R.Rajaraman \n\n:JUDGMENT   \n<\/pre>\n<p>        Second Appeal was directed against the judgment  dated  30.06.1993  in<br \/>\nA.S.8  of  1991  of  the  Sub Court, Nagapattinam, which reversed the judgment<br \/>\ndated 27.02.1990 in dismissing the suit in O.S.133 of  1988  by  the  District<br \/>\nMunsif, Thiruvarur.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.  During the course of admission, the following substantial question<br \/>\nof law was framed:\n<\/p>\n<p>Whether  the  plaintiff  can succeed on the basis of the case of the defendant<br \/>\nwithout proving his own case and abandoning the same ?\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.  The  suit  was  originally  filed  for  permanent  injunction  and<br \/>\nsubsequently   amended  as  one  for  mandatory  injunction  to  demolish  the<br \/>\nconstruction made by the defendant in the suit  site,  which  belongs  to  the<br \/>\nrespondent\/ plaintiff temple.    The  suit  land  is measuring 4912 sq.ft.  in<br \/>\nT.S.No.979\/1 in Block No.22, Ward No.3  in  Vijayapuram  of  Thiruvarur;  that<br \/>\nconsists  of  two  non-residential buildings, bearing door No.22 C and 22D and<br \/>\none residential building bearing door No.23.\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.  Originally the land was an inam land to which Section 13 of  Tamil<br \/>\nNadu  Minor  Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 196 3 (Act 30<br \/>\nof 1983)was found applicable.  Under Ex.A-1, there was a suo motu enquiry held<br \/>\nby the Settlement Tahsildar, Thanjavur under the provisions of Act 30  of  83,<br \/>\nfor the  purpose  of  grant of ryotwari patta.  The notified date was taken as<br \/>\n15.02.1965.  Arunachalam, the original defendant also took part along with the<br \/>\nauthorities of the plaintiff temple in  the  said  enquiry.    As  Arunachalam<br \/>\nsubsequently  expired,  his legal representatives were added as the appellants<br \/>\nin the appellate stage.  It is in that Settlement Proceedings Ex.A-1,  mention<br \/>\nwas  made about the conveyance of permanent paguthi right and para 6 of Ex.A-1<br \/>\nspecifically contained that what was conveyed was only the paguthi rights  and<br \/>\nthe ownership of the building.  It was ultimately found as follows:<br \/>\n&#8220;I  therefore  order  that the buildings in the suit land shall with effect on<br \/>\nand from the appointed day vest under section 13(1) of the Act jointly in  the<br \/>\ninstitution  and  the  respondent No.1 (Arunachalam Chettiar) as determined in<br \/>\nthe Schedule&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.  According to the Settlement Proceedings, the  title  in  the  suit<br \/>\nbuilding  vest  jointly  in the institution and the appellants&#8217; predecessor by<br \/>\nname Arunachalam.  Thus the appellants will be entitled to 50% of the building<br \/>\nwhile the other 50% remain vested with the respondent temple.  Inasmuch as the<br \/>\nbuilding as a whole remains in the possession  of  the  appellants\/defendants,<br \/>\n50%  of their possession is due to their ownership and the remaining 50% is in<br \/>\nthe capacity of a lessee.  There seems to be some arrears of lease and that is<br \/>\nwhy, even in the course of evidence on the side of respondent  \/plaintiff,  it<br \/>\nhas  been  clearly  stated  that  because  of  the pending ar rears, they were<br \/>\nnecessitated to file the suit.  Thus, the motive for filing the  suit  is  the<br \/>\npendancy  of  arrears, with which we are not concerned here as the suit is not<br \/>\nfor claiming arrears.   From  the  above  evidence,  the  leasehold  right  of<br \/>\nappellants in the suit building is made known.\n<\/p>\n<p>        6.   The contention of the respondent\/ plaintiff is that the defendant<br \/>\nhas removed the tiled roof of the building and had changed  it  into  concrete<br \/>\nroof.   Thus,  according to the counsel for the respondent\/ plaintiff, this is<br \/>\nnot permissible under section 108(p) of the Transfer of Property Act.  Section<br \/>\n108(p) of the Transfer of Property Act provides,<br \/>\n&#8220;In the absence of a contract or local usage to the contrary, the  lessor  and<br \/>\nthe  lessee  of  immovable  property,  as  against  one another, respectively,<br \/>\npossess the rights and are subject to the liabilities mentioned in  the  rules<br \/>\nnext followed, or such of them as are applicable to the property leased&#8230;.\n<\/p>\n<p>(p)  he  must  not,  without  the  lessor&#8217;s consent, erect on the property any<br \/>\npermanent structure, except for agricultural purposes'&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>        7.  The purpose of the building  is  residential  and  therefore,  the<br \/>\nlessee,  as  per  the  above  provision,  shall not without the consent of the<br \/>\nlessor, erect  on  the  property  any  permanent  structure.    So,  what  was<br \/>\nprohibited  by  the provision is erection of a permanent structure in the said<br \/>\nland without the consent of the lessor.  This  presupposes  the  existence  of<br \/>\n&#8216;Nil&#8217;  building  or  a  temporary  construction,  which according to the above<br \/>\nprovision, should not be erected or constructed of a permanent nature  without<br \/>\nthe lessor&#8217;s consent.    There  is  no lessor&#8217;s consent herein.  Therefore, if<br \/>\nthere was vacant land or that there was a temporary shed, new construction  or<br \/>\nconversion  of  a  temporary  construction  into  permanent structure is alone<br \/>\nprohibited.  But counsel for the appellants agreed that there was an existence<br \/>\nof a permanent structure and the defendant had only removed the tiled roof and<br \/>\nconverted it into a concrete roof.    For  which,  of  course,  there  was  no<br \/>\npermission granted  by  the  lessor.   Whether this conversion of a tiled roof<br \/>\ninto a concrete roof would make the above provision  applicable  is  depending<br \/>\nupon the  fact  that  the existing tiled roof shall be a temporary one.  In no<br \/>\nstretch of imagination, it can be said that tiled roof  is  only  a  temporary<br \/>\none.   If that roof was made up of hay ricks or some leaves of coconut tree or<br \/>\npalmyrah tree, then it may be  considered  as  a  temporary  structure,  which<br \/>\nshould  not have been converted into either tiled or concrete roof without the<br \/>\nconsent of a lessor.  Now, it is only one form of permanent structure that was<br \/>\nconverted into another form of permanent structure.  This was  not  prohibited<br \/>\nby  section  108(p) of Transfer of Property Act nor does it expect the consent<br \/>\nof a lessor.  It is also not the case of the respondent \/ plaintiff that  some<br \/>\ndamage had been made to the building at the risk and cost of plaintiff temple.<br \/>\nAfter  all, it is only an improvement to the building and no damage was either<br \/>\nalleged, pleaded or proved.\n<\/p>\n<p>        8.  In such circumstances, the finding of  the  appellate  court  that<br \/>\nthere  are  basic  grounds  for  granting  mandatory  injunction is incorrect.<br \/>\nDemolishing a permanent building would no  way  cause  any  advantage  to  the<br \/>\nplaintiff,  but  in  the  alternative,  it  has only become added asset to the<br \/>\ntemple.  There is no benefit for either of the parties in such demolition.  It<br \/>\nis also not as if the building is an  old  building,  liable  for  demolition.<br \/>\nRegarding the  age  of  the  building,  there is no evidence.  The respondent\/<br \/>\nplaintiff should not also rely  upon  the  weakness  of  the  appellants\/legal<br \/>\nrepresentatives of the defendant in getting a decree.  The question of law is,<br \/>\naccordingly, answered in favour of the appellants.\n<\/p>\n<p>        9.   Second  Appeal  is allowed and the suit is dismissed by restoring<br \/>\nthe decree of the trial court and  setting  aside  the  decree  of  the  first<br \/>\nappellate court.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index:Yes.\n<\/p>\n<p>Internet:Yes.\n<\/p>\n<p>gl<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1) The Subordinate Judge,<br \/>\nNagapattinam.\n<\/p>\n<p>2) The District Munsif,<br \/>\nThiruvarur.\n<\/p>\n<p>Copy to:\n<\/p>\n<p>The Record Keeper,<br \/>\nV.R.Section,<br \/>\nHigh Court,Madras.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Kamalambal vs Arulmigu Renuka Devi on 22 February, 2005 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated: 22\/02\/2005 Coram The Honourable Mr. Justice S.R.SINGHARAVELU Second Appeal No.1117 of 1994 1. Kamalambal 2. A.Jayapal ..Appellants -Vs- Arulmigu Renuka Devi Amman Temple, Vijayapuram, Thiruvarur Taluk and Munsif, rep.by its Executive Officer ..Respondent Second [&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-203639","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>Kamalambal vs Arulmigu Renuka Devi on 22 February, 2005 - 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\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kamalambal vs Arulmigu Renuka Devi on 22 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005\" \/>\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=\"2005-02-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-02-05T07:10:41+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\\\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kamalambal vs Arulmigu Renuka Devi on 22 February, 2005\",\"datePublished\":\"2005-02-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-02-05T07:10:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005\"},\"wordCount\":1145,\"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\\\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005\",\"name\":\"Kamalambal vs Arulmigu Renuka Devi on 22 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2005-02-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-02-05T07:10:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kamalambal vs Arulmigu Renuka Devi on 22 February, 2005\"}]},{\"@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":"Kamalambal vs Arulmigu Renuka Devi on 22 February, 2005 - 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\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kamalambal vs Arulmigu Renuka Devi on 22 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2005-02-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-02-05T07:10:41+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\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kamalambal vs Arulmigu Renuka Devi on 22 February, 2005","datePublished":"2005-02-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-02-05T07:10:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005"},"wordCount":1145,"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\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005","name":"Kamalambal vs Arulmigu Renuka Devi on 22 February, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2005-02-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-02-05T07:10:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamalambal-vs-arulmigu-renuka-devi-on-22-february-2005#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kamalambal vs Arulmigu Renuka Devi on 22 February, 2005"}]},{"@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\/203639","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=203639"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/203639\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=203639"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=203639"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=203639"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}