{"id":208360,"date":"2008-11-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008"},"modified":"2019-04-11T11:43:01","modified_gmt":"2019-04-11T06:13:01","slug":"metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"Metropolitan Transport vs J.Annapushpam on 7 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
Metropolitan Transport vs J.Annapushpam on 7 November, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED: 7.11.2008\n\nCORAM\n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR\n\nC.M.A.No.3380 of 2008\nand\nM.P.No.1 of 2008 \n\n \nMetropolitan Transport \nCorporation (Chennai) Ltd.,\nrepresented by its \nManaging Director,\nPallavan House,\nAnna Salai,\nChennai-2.                                        ... Appellant\/Respondent\n\n\n\t\t                   vs.\t\t\t\t\n\n1.J.Annapushpam,\n2.J.Samrose,\n3.J.Jemina,\n4.J.Johnson,\n5.J.Hepziba Beulah.                             ... Respondents\/Petitioners \n\n\n\tCivil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the  award  and decree dated 13.3.2007 passed in M.C.O.P.No.1318 of 2003  on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Chief Court of Small Causes), Chennai.\n\n\n\t\tFor appellant       :  Mr.M.Deivanandam \t \n\n-----\nJUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
\t Metropolitan Transport Corporation is on appeal challenging the award dated 13.3.2007 passed in M.C.O.P.No.1318 of 2003  on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Chief Court of Small Causes), Chennai.\n<\/p>\n
\t2.  During the pendency of the claim, fourth claimant, the fourth respondent herein died.  Ex.P-6 death certificate was  filed.  Ex.P-7 legal heir certificate showing the mother as his legal heir was also filed. The award also granted in favour of the respondents 1 to 3 and 5\/respondents 1 to 3 and 5.   Without noting the facts, this appeal is filed against the said death person also.\n<\/p>\n
\t3.  The only contention raised by the counsel for the appellant is on the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n
\t4.  It is a case of fatal accident.    The brief facts of the case are as follows:- The accident in this case happened on 18.3.2003.    The deceased A.Jayaraj  aged  58 years, engaged in business of selling eggs,  was waiting at the bus stop on Konnur High Road.  The bus bearing Registration No.TN-01-N-2370 (Route No.27-D) belonging to the appellant Metropolitan Transport Corporation came to the bus stop.   The conductor of the bus blew the whistle without noticing that passengers are getting in and out and the driver without due care and caution and without noticing if there were any passenger getting in or out,  started the vehicle suddenly.  As a result of which, the said Jayaraj was thrown out of the bus and the rear wheel of the bus ran over the left leg of the said Jayaraj.   In that accident the said Jayaraj suffered grievous injuries.  In spite of  treatment in the hospital he died.     The wife aged  50 years, two sons, aged  26 years and 22 years, and two daughters aged 24 years and  20 years   filed a claim for compensation in a sum of Rs.5 lakhs, stating that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.6,000\/- per month.\n<\/p>\n
\t5.  In support of the claim, the wife of the deceased was  examined as P.W.1.  One T.Jayapandian, the eye witness, was examined as P.W.2.      Exs.P-1 to P-7 were marked, the details of which are as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
Ex.P-1 is the copy of F.I.R.,
\nEx.P-2 is the copy of rough sketch,<\/p>\n
Ex.P-3 is the copy of post-mortem certificate,<\/p>\n
Es.P-4 is the death certificate, <\/p>\n
Ex.P-5 is the legal heir certificate, <\/p>\n
Ex.P-6 is the death certificate of Johnson and<\/p>\n
Ex.P-7 is the legal heir certificate of Johnson.\n<\/p>\n
On behalf of the appellant transport corporation, respondent before the Tribunal, no document was filed.  The driver  of the bus was examined as R.W.1.\n<\/p>\n
\t6.  The Tribunal decided the negligence in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the award in answer to Point No.1.   The Tribunal fixed the negligence on the part of the driver and the conductor of the bus and consequently, the liability was fixed on the appellant transport corporation.  The accident in this case happened in the bus stop.  There is no  material to show that the deceased was negligent.  The driver of the bus should have taken due care before starting the vehicle.  The finding of the Tribunal with regard to negligence on the part of the driver of the bus is confirmed as there is no material placed to state otherwise.\n<\/p>\n
\t7.  Insofar as the compensation is concerned, the same was dealt with from  paragraphs 7 to 9 of the award   in answer to point No.2.  It is not in dispute that the deceased was 58 years old.  Claimants claimed the income of the deceased at Rs.6,000\/- per month.  The Tribunal accepted the said stand and fixed the income of the deceased at Rs.6,000\/- per month, of which 1\/3 was deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased and the loss of contribution  to the family of the deceased was taken as Rs.4,000\/- per month and Rs.48,000\/- per annum.  Since the deceased was found to be aged 60 years as per post-mortem certificate, multiplier 5 was adopted and a sum of Rs.2,40,000\/- (Rs.48,000\/- x 5 = Rs.2,40,000\/-) was granted towards pecuniary loss to the dependents of the deceased.   In addition, the Tribunal also granted compensation under conventional heads.  In all, the Tribunal granted the following amounts as compensation with interest at 7.5%:-\n<\/p>\n
Sl.No.\n<\/p>\n
Head
\nAmount granted by the Tribunal
\n1<\/span>
\nLoss of pecuniary benefits to the dependents
\nRs.2,40,000\/-\n<\/p>\n
2<\/span><\/p>\n
Loss of consortium to the wife  on the death of her husband
\nRs.   20,000\/-\n<\/p>\n
3<\/span><\/p>\n
Loss of love and affection to the children on the death of their father
\nRs.   25,000\/-<\/p>\n
\n4<\/span>\nFuneral expenses  \nRs.     5,000\/-\n\nTotal\nRs.2,90,000\/-\n\n<\/pre>\n
\t8.   The only contention raised by the counsel for the appellant is that the income of the deceased taken at Rs.6,000\/- per month is on the higher side and therefore, the compensation should be reduced.\n<\/p>\n
\t9.  This Court is not inclined to interfere with the award and to reduce the quantum of compensation for the following reasons:-\n<\/p>\n
(i) In this case, the deceased was 58 years and claimed to be a business man dealing with egg merchant.  He was supporting a family  consisting of wife, two young sons and two young daughters.  He would have earned substantial sum to bring up all the four children.  The daughters, if not married, are of marriageable age.  Unless the deceased had substantial income, he could not have maintain  a family of wife and four children.  The accident in this case happened on 18.3.2003.\n<\/p>\n
(ii) The following two decisions will have to be kept in mind while fixing the income of the deceased:-\n<\/p>\n
\t(a) A Division Bench of this Court in B.Anandhi  vs. – Latha reported in 2002 ACJ 233(P.SATHASIVAM,J., as he then was) observed that a coolie would earn Rs.100\/- per day.  In that case, the accident happened in the year 1995.\n<\/p>\n
\t(b) The Apex Court in State of Haryana and another  vs. – Jasbir Kaur and others reported in 2004-1 Law Weekly, was of the view that an agriculturist would earn Rs.3,000\/- per month.  In  that case, the accident happened in the year 1999.\n<\/p>\n
\tIn the above cited cases, the income of the deceased  was taken at Rs.3,000\/- per month for the year 1995 and 1999 respectively, whereas in the present case, the accident happened in the year 2003.  Considering the same, and also the fact that the deceased   was a business man, the income of the deceased can be taken at least Rs.5,000\/-  per month.\n<\/p>\n
(iii) Since the wife was aged 50 years, one daughter is aged 20 years and considering the age of the deceased who was 60 years as per post-mortem certificate, the multiplier that should have been taken is  “8” as per second schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act.  However, in this case  5 multiplier alone has been taken.    Since lesser multiplier has been taken, the marginally higher income fixed by the Tribunal will compensate for the same.\n<\/p>\n
(iv) In any event the total compensation on the death of 58 to 60 years old businessman is only Rs.2,90,000\/-.\n<\/p>\n
(v)\t The appellant  has  not  made out a case to reduce the compensation any further.\n<\/p>\n
(vi) This court is unable to find any good reason to interfere with the quantum of compensation as well as the interest  granted by the Tribunal at 7.5%   as the accident happened in the year 2003 and the award was passed in the year 2007.\n<\/p>\n
\t10.  Finding no merit, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed at the admission stage.  Counsel for the appellant seeks eight weeks’ time to deposit the award amount and  is granted and on such deposit, the respondents 1 to 3 and 5\/claimants 1 to 3 and 5 are entitled to withdraw the same as ordered by the Tribunal.  Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.\n<\/p>\n
ts\t\t\t<\/p>\n
To<\/p>\n
1. Chief Judge,
\n    Court of Small Causes,
\n    (The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal),
\n    Chennai<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court Metropolitan Transport vs J.Annapushpam on 7 November, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 7.11.2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR C.M.A.No.3380 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008 Metropolitan Transport Corporation (Chennai) Ltd., represented by its Managing Director, Pallavan House, Anna Salai, Chennai-2. … Appellant\/Respondent vs. 1.J.Annapushpam, 2.J.Samrose, 3.J.Jemina, 4.J.Johnson, […]<\/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-208360","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nMetropolitan Transport vs J.Annapushpam on 7 November, 2008 - 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\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Metropolitan Transport vs J.Annapushpam on 7 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-11-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-04-11T06:13:01+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\\\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Metropolitan Transport vs J.Annapushpam on 7 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-11T06:13:01+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1286,\"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\\\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008\",\"name\":\"Metropolitan Transport vs J.Annapushpam on 7 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-11T06:13:01+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Metropolitan Transport vs J.Annapushpam on 7 November, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Metropolitan Transport vs J.Annapushpam on 7 November, 2008 - 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\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Metropolitan Transport vs J.Annapushpam on 7 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-04-11T06:13:01+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\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Metropolitan Transport vs J.Annapushpam on 7 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-11T06:13:01+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008"},"wordCount":1286,"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\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008","name":"Metropolitan Transport vs J.Annapushpam on 7 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-11T06:13:01+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/metropolitan-transport-vs-j-annapushpam-on-7-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Metropolitan Transport vs J.Annapushpam on 7 November, 2008"}]},{"@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\/208360","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=208360"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/208360\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=208360"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=208360"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=208360"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}