{"id":21333,"date":"2005-06-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-06-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005"},"modified":"2014-10-22T01:00:42","modified_gmt":"2014-10-21T19:30:42","slug":"t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005","title":{"rendered":"T.A.Krishnan vs Chithran on 3 June, 2005"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
T.A.Krishnan vs Chithran on 3 June, 2005<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCRP No. 1140 of 1996\n\n\n1. T.A.KRISHNAN\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n1. CHITHRAN\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.M.NAZAR\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.VAKKOM N.VIJAYAN\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN\n\n Dated :     03\/06\/2005\n O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
………L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T……J
\n          K.T. SANKARAN, J.@@
\n         jAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA\n<\/p>\n
          ——————————–@@
\n         j
\n          @@
\n         j
\n          C.R.P. NO. 1140 OF 1996 B@@
\n         j\n<\/p>\n
          ——————————–@@
\n         j
\n          @@
\n         j
\n          Dated this the 3rd day of  June, 2005.@@
\n         j               AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
\n          @@
\n         j
\n          O R D E R@@
\n         jEEEEEEEEE<\/p>\n
.SP 2
\n((HDR 0
\nC.R.P.NO.  1140 OF 1996<\/p>\n
 ::  # ::@@
\nj<\/p>\n
))
\n.HE 1
\n         \tThe petitioner in Indigent O.P.No.1 of 1994,  on
\n         the  file  of  the court of the Munsiff of Vaikom is the
\n         revision petitioner.    The  court  below  rejected  the
\n         Indigent O.P.   on the ground that as on the date of the
\n         Petition, the suit is barred by limitation.\n<\/p>\n
         \t2.  The petitioner claimed a sum of Rs.15,000\/as
\n         damages in   the   plaint.    It  is  alleged  that  the
\n         respondents  attacked  the  petitioner  with   dangerous
\n         weapons on  10.5.1985 and caused grievous injuries.  The
\n         petitioner was taken  to  the  hospital  and  after  the
\n         treatment  for  41  days,  he  was  discharged  from the
\n         hospital on  20.6.1985.    Criminal   proceedings   were
\n         initiated against the respondents in C.C.No.344 of 1985.
\n         The  criminal  court found the respondents guilty of the
\n         offence and convicted  and  sentenced  them  to  undergo
\n         imprisonment.    On   appeal  by  the  respondents,  the
\n         Appellate Court acquitted  respondents  3  to  7  and  a
\n         lesser sentence was imposed on respondents 1 and 2.  The
\n         High Court confirmed the decision of the Appellate Court
\n         in revision.    The  sentence was executed on 8.10.1993.
\n         The present suit is sought to be filed  as  an  indigent
\n         person   claiming   damages   of  Rs.15,000\/-  from  the
\n         respondents in respect of the incident involved  in  the
\n         criminal case.    It  is  stated  in the plaint that the
\n         cause  of  action  for  the  suit  arose  on  10.5.1985,
\n         31.12.1988, 1.3.1991, 11.8.1992 and 8.10.1993, the dates
\n         being  respectively  the date of occurrence, date of the
\n         trial  court  judgment,  the  date  of   the   appellate
\n         judgment,  date  of  disposal  of  the criminal revision
\n         petition by the High Court and the date of execution  of
\n         the sentence.\n<\/p>\n
         \t3.  The court below held that the petitioner has
\n         no means to pay the court fee.  However, the court below
\n         held  that the suit would be barred by limitation as the
\n         cause of action arose on 10.5.1985 and the Indigent O.P.
\n         was filed only on 11.2.1994.  The court below held  that
\n         Article 113 of the Limitation Act applies and the period
\n         of  limitation is three years from the date on which the
\n         right to sue accrues.   The  court  below  rejected  the
\n         contention  of  the  petitioner  that  the  right to sue
\n         accrued only on 8.10.1993, the date of execution of  the
\n         sentence.  The court below also rejected the alternative
\n         contention  that  the  right  to  sue  accrued  only  on
\n         11.8.1992, the date of disposal of the criminal revision
\n         petition.\n<\/p>\n
         \t4.   It  is not disputed that Article 113 of the
\n         Limitation Act applies to the case and that  the  period
\n         of  limitation  is  three  years  from the date when the
\n         right to sue accrued.  It is also not disputed that  the
\n         trial  court  is  entitled to reject the application for
\n         permission to sue as  an  indigent  person  under  Order
\n         XXXIII  Rule  5(f) of the Code of Civil Procedure if the
\n         suit is barred by limitation  as  on  the  date  of  the
\n         filing of the indigent O.P.\n<\/p>\n
         \t5.  The counsel  for  the  petitioner  raised  a
\n         contention  that  the period of limitation begins to run
\n         not from the date of occurrence but from the date of the
\n         final judgment by the High Court  in  criminal  revision
\n         petition.   The reason for this submission, according to
\n         him, is based on Section 357 of  the  Code  of  Criminal
\n         Procedure.\n<\/p>\n
         \t6.    Section   357  of  the  Code  of  Criminal
\n         Procedure (omitting unnecessary portions) reads thus:\n<\/p>\n
……………L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T.J
\n……………L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T.J
\n.SP 1
\n               \t“357.       Order      to       pay@@
\n                 AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
\n               compensation:(1)  When  a  Court  imposes a@@
\n               AAAAAAAAAAAAA
\n               sentence of fine or a sentence (including a
\n               sentence of death) of which  fine  forms  a
\n               part,  the Court may, when passing judgment
\n               order the whole or any  part  of  the  fine
\n               recovered to be applied —\n<\/p>\n
               (a) .....    ...@@\n                  i\n               \n<\/pre>\n
               (b) in  the  payment  to  any person of@@
\n                  i
\n                       compensation for any loss or injury
\n                       caused   by   the   offence,   when
\n                       compensation  is, in the opinion of
\n                       the  Court,  recoverable  by   such
\n                       person in a Civil Court;\n<\/p>\n
               (c) when any person is convicted of any@@
\n                  i
\n                       offence for having caused the death
\n                       of  another  person  or  of  having
\n                       abetted the commission of  such  an
\n                       offence,  in paying compensation to
\n                       the  persons  who  are,  under  the
\n                       Fatal  Accidents  Act,  1855 (13 of
\n                       1855), entitled to recover  damages
\n                       from  the  person sentenced for the
\n                       loss resulting to  them  from  such
\n                       death;\n<\/p>\n
               (d) ....    .....@@\n                  i\n               \n               \t(2) If the fine  is  imposed  in  a\n<\/pre>\n
               case  which  is  subject to appeal, no such
\n               payment shall be  made  before  the  period
\n               allowed   for  presenting  the  appeal  has
\n               elapsed, or  if  an  appeal  be  presented,
\n               before the decision of the appeal.\n<\/p>\n
               \t(3)    When   a   Court  imposes  a
\n               sentence, of which fine  does  not  form  a
\n               part,  the Court may, when passing judgment
\n               order the accused person to pay, by way  of
\n               compensation   such   amount   as   may  be
\n               specified in the order to  the  person  who
\n               has  suffered  any loss or injury by reason
\n               of the act for which the accused person has
\n               been so sentenced.\n<\/p>\n
               \t(4)  An order  under  this  section
\n               may  also  be made by an Appellate Court or
\n               by the High Court or Court of Session  when
\n               exercising its powers of revision.\n<\/p>\n
               \t(5)  At  the   time   of   awarding
\n               compensation  in  any subsequent civil suit
\n               relating to  the  same  matter,  the  Court
\n               shall  take  into  account  any sum paid or
\n               recovered  as   compensation   under   this
\n               section.”\n<\/p>\n
……..L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….J
\n.SP 2<\/p>\n
        \t7.  Under Section 357 of  the  Code  of  Criminal
\n        Procedure,  the  criminal court may award compensation to
\n        the  victim  either  under  subsection  (1)(b)  or  under
\n        subsection (3).    When  the  court imposes a sentence of
\n        fine or a sentence of which fine forms a part, the  court
\n        may  award  compensation  to  any  person for any loss or
\n        injury  caused  by  the  offence  under  clause  (b)   of
\n        subsection  (1)  of Section 357, if in the opinion of the
\n        court compensation is recoverable by  such  person  in  a
\n        civil court.    Even  when the fine does not form part of
\n        the sentence, the court may  award  compensation  to  the
\n.PL 51
\n        victim,  payable by the accused person, as per subsection
\n        (3) of Section 357.  It is not provided in subsection (3)
\n        of Section 357 that the person to whom compensation is to
\n.PL 54
\n        be awarded must  be  a  person  who  could  recover  such
\n        compensation  in  a civil court, as is the case in clause\n<\/p>\n
        (b) of subsection (1) of  Section  357  of  the  Code  of
\n        Criminal Procedure.    Subsection  (4)  provides that the
\n        Appellate Court or the Revisional Court may also pass  an
\n        order under  Section  357.   Relying on subsection (5) of
\n        Section 357, the counsel  for  the  petitioner  contended
\n        that  since  the  civil court shall take into account any
\n        sum paid or recovered as compensation under  Section  357
\n        of  the  Code  of  Criminal  Procedure,  at  the  time of
\n        awarding compensation in the civil suit, it is to be held
\n        that the period of limitation for filing the suit  starts
\n        from   the   date  of  disposal  of  the  criminal  case.
\n        Therefore, it is contended that  the  victim  could  wait
\n        till  the  disposal of the criminal case and his right to
\n        file a civil suit for compensation could be reckoned from
\n        the date of disposal of the criminal case.\n<\/p>\n
        \t8.  I do not agree with the contentions raised by
\n        the  counsel  for  the  petitioner  on  the  question  of
\n        limitation, for the following reasons:\n<\/p>\n
        \tThe  Limitation  Act, 1963 is an exhaustive Code.
\n        In A.S.K.Krishnappa Chettiar and others v.   S.V.V.Somiah@@
\n           EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE      EEEEEEEEEEEE
\n        @  Navniappa  Chettiar  and another (AIR 1964 SC 227) the@@
\n        EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
\n        Supreme Court held that:\n<\/p>\n
……………L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T.J
\n……………L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T.J
\n.SP 1
\n               \t“…    The  Limitation  Act  is  a
\n               consolidating and amending statute relating
\n               to the limitation  of  suits,  appeals  and
\n               certain types of applications to courts and
\n               must,   therefore,   be   regarded   as  an
\n               exhaustive Code.    It  is   a   piece   of
\n               adjective  or  procedural  law  and  not of
\n               substantive law.    Rules   of   procedure,
\n               whatever  they  may  be,  are to be applied
\n               only to matters  to  which  they  are  made
\n               applicable  by the legislature expressly or
\n               by necessary implication.  They  cannot  be
\n               extended   by   analogy   or  reference  to
\n               proceedings to which they do not  expressly
\n               apply   or   could  be  said  to  apply  by
\n               necessary implication……”\n<\/p>\n
……..L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….J
\n.SP 2
\n        In Nagendra  Nath  Dey and another v.  Suresh Chandra Dey@@
\n           EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE     EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
\n        and others  (AIR  1932  Privy  Council  165),  the  Privy@@
\n        EEEEEEEEEE
\n        Council held:\n<\/p>\n
……………L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T.J
\n……………L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T.J
\n.SP 1
\n               \t“The   fixation   of   periods   of
\n               limitation must always be  to  some  extent
\n               arbitrary,  and  may  frequently  result in
\n               hardship.    But   in    construing    such
\n               provisions equitable considerations are out
\n               of   place,   and  the  strict  grammatical
\n               meaning of  the  words  is  the  only  safe
\n               guide.”\n<\/p>\n
……..L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….J
\n.SP 2
\n        In General Accident Fire  &  Life  Assurance  Corporation@@
\n           EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
\n        Ltd.  v.   Janmahomed Abdul Rahim (AIR 1941 Privy Council@@
\n        EEEE       EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE\n<\/p>\n
        6), the following passage from Tagore  Law  Lectures  was
\n        quoted with approval:\n<\/p>\n
……………L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T.J
\n.SP 1
\n               \t“A   law    of    limitation    and
\n               prescription  may appear to operate harshly
\n               or unjustly in particular cases, but  where
\n               such law has been adopted by the state ….
\n               it  must  if  unambiguous  be  applied with
\n               stringency.  The rule must be enforced even
\n               at the risk of  hardship  to  a  particular
\n               party.    The  Judge  cannot  on  equitable
\n               grounds enlarge the  time  allowed  by  the
\n               law,  postpone  its operation, or introduce
\n               exceptions not recognized by it.”\n<\/p>\n
……..L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….J
\n.SP 2
\n        The Privy Council in the said decision held:\n<\/p>\n
……………L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T.J
\n……………L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T.J
\n.SP 1
\n               \t“Very    little    reflection    is
\n               necessary  to  show that great hardship may
\n               occasionally  be  caused  by  statutes   of
\n               limitation  in  cases  of poverty, distress
\n               and ignorance of rights; yet the  statutory
\n               rules  must  be enforced according to their
\n               ordinary meaning in these and in other like
\n               cases.”\n<\/p>\n
……..L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….J
\n.SP 2
\n        The decisions in AIR 1932 PC 165 and AIR 1941 PC  6  were
\n        quoted with  approval in Bootamal v.  Union of India (AIR<\/a>@@
\n                                 EEEEEEEE     EEEEEEEEEEEEEE
\n        1962 SC 1716).\n<\/p>\n
        \t9.  In Balakrishnan  v.    Mohammed  Basheer  and@@
\n                EEEEEEEEEEEE        EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
\n        others (1999(2) KLJ 758) this Court held that:@@
\n        EEEEEE<\/p>\n
……………L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T.J
\n.SP 1
\n               \t“The law of limitation  is  not  an
\n               equitable statute.    It  is  a  statute of
\n               repose.  It is enacted pursuant to a public
\n               policy  that  legal  rights  ought  to   be
\n               enforced through courts within a time frame
\n               and  stale  causes  of action should not be
\n               permitted to be agitated.”\n<\/p>\n
……..L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….J
\n.SP 2\n<\/p>\n
        \t10.  There is no law of  limitation  outside  the
\n        Limitation   Act   excepting   specific   provisions   of
\n        limitation for suits or  proceedings  contained  in  some
\n        specified Acts.    The  Limitation  Act  forbids suits or
\n        proceedings being brought  after  the  period  prescribed
\n        which commences  from  some  definite  event.  “Period of
\n        limitation” as defined in the Limitation  Act  means  the
\n        period  of  limitation prescribed for any suit, appeal or
\n        application by the Schedule and “prescribed period” means
\n        the period of limitation computed in accordance with  the
\n        provisions of  the  Limitation  Act.   The purpose of the
\n        Limitation Act is not to give  a  right  where  there  is
\n        none.  It is intended to impose a bar on filing suits and
\n        initiating proceedings  after  a certain period.  Section
\n        29 of the Limitation Act provides that where any  special
\n        or   local   law  prescribes  for  any  suit,  appeal  or
\n        application a period of  limitation  different  from  the
\n        period  prescribed  by  the  Schedule,  the provisions of
\n        Section 3 shall apply as if such period were  the  period
\n        prescribed  by  the  Schedule  and  for  the  purpose  of
\n        determining any period of limitation prescribed  for  any
\n        suit,  appeal or application by any special or local law,
\n        the provisions contained in Section 4 to 24  shall  apply
\n        only  in  so far as, and to the extent to which, they are
\n        not expressly excluded by  such  special  or  local  law.
\n        Section 3 of the Limitation Act is peremptory; every suit
\n        instituted,  appeal preferred and application made, after
\n        the  prescribed  period  shall  be  dismissed,   although
\n        limitation has  not  been  set  up  as a defence.  If any
\n        special or local law prescribes a period  different  from
\n        the  period provided in the Limitation Act, the period of
\n        limitation provided in such special or  local  law  would
\n        apply.  It cannot be said that Section 357 of the Code of
\n        Criminal  Procedure  provides  for a period of limitation
\n        different from the period prescribed by the  Schedule  to
\n        the Limitation   Act,  1963.    In  fact,  no  period  of
\n        limitation is provided in Section  357  of  the  Code  of
\n        Criminal Procedure.    Therefore, there is no question of
\n        any period of limitation being different from the  period
\n        of limitation provided in the Limitation Act.\n<\/p>\n
        \t11.    It   is   a   well  settled  principle  of
\n        interpretation of  statutes  that  the  provisions  of  a
\n        statute ought not to be used for the purpose of defeating
\n        the legislative   mandate   of   another  statute.    The
\n        provision for awarding compensation under Section 357  of
\n        the   Code  of  Criminal  Procedure  does  not  have  any
\n        relevance in  computing  the  period  of  limitation  for
\n        filing a  suit  for  compensation.    Subsection  (5)  of
\n        Section 357 of  the  Code  of  Criminal  Procedure  which
\n        provides that at the time of awarding compensation in the
\n        civil  suit,  the  Court  shall take into account any sum
\n        paid or recovered as compensation, does  not  govern  the
\n        period of  limitation  for  filing  the  suit.    It  has
\n        relevance only in fixing the compensation to be  paid  to
\n        the plaintiff in the suit.  Such a provision of law which
\n        has  only such relevance in the matter of fixation of the
\n        quantum  of  compensation  cannot   be   interpreted   as
\n        governing the   period  of  limitation.    The  suit  for
\n        compensation is to be filed within the  specified  period
\n        from the  date  of  accrual  of  the cause of action.  It
\n        cannot be said that the cause of action for filing a suit
\n        for compensation would accrue  on  the  disposal  of  the
\n        criminal  case  in  which  compensation  is awarded under
\n        Section 357 of the  Code  of  Criminal  Procedure.    The
\n        chance of the criminal court awarding compensation to the
\n        victim   under  Section  357  of  the  Code  of  Criminal
\n        Procedure would not constitute  a  cause  of  action  for
\n        filing a  suit  for compensation.  On the other hand, the
\n        cause of action for the suit is the tortious act and  not
\n        the  awarding  of  compensation  under Section 357 of the
\n        Code of  Criminal  Procedure.    In  a  given  case,  the
\n        criminal  court  may  or  may not grant compensation even
\n        after holding that  the  accused  person  is  guilty  and
\n        liable to  sentence of fine.  Or, in a case where no fine
\n        is imposed, the Criminal Court may or may not be inclined
\n        to grant compensation to the victim under subsection  (3)
\n        of Section  357  of  the Code of Criminal Procedure.  The
\n        award of compensation under Section 357 of  the  Code  of
\n        Criminal  Procedure  is only a chance and not a specified
\n        certain event.  It does not create a cause of action  for
\n        the   awardee   of   compensation   for   claiming   more
\n        compensation.  It does  not  take  away  or  abridge  the
\n        accrued right  of the victim to claim compensation.  When
\n        a right to institute a suit accrues, nothing prevents the
\n        running of the period of limitation.    In  the  criminal
\n        case,  the  final report may be filed by the police after
\n        quite some time from the date of the incident.  The cause
\n        of action for filing a suit for compensation  accrues  on
\n        the  date  of the incident in which the plaintiff suffers
\n        loss or injury and the period of  limitation  for  filing
\n        the  suit  for compensation begins to run from that date.
\n        The initiation of criminal proceedings would not stop the
\n        running of the period of limitation for filing the  suit.
\n        Period  of  limitation  does  not  get  arrested  by  the
\n        pendency of the criminal proceedings.   No  exclusion  of
\n        the period of limitation is possible under the Limitation
\n        Act  to exclude the period covered by the pendency of the
\n        criminal proceedings.     Awarding   compensation   under
\n        Section  357  of the Code of Criminal Procedure is in the
\n        discretion of the criminal court.   Compensation  may  or
\n        may not  be  granted  by the criminal court.  It does not
\n        govern the proceedings in  the  civil  suit.    The  only
\n        relevance  of  the  compensation  being  awarded  in  the
\n        criminal case is  on  the  question  of  the  quantum  of
\n        compensation to  be  awarded  in  the civil suit.  If the
\n        civil suit  has  already  been  disposed  of  before  the
\n        disposal  of  the  criminal  case  and  compensation  has
\n        already been awarded to the  plaintiff,  that  may  be  a
\n        ground  for denying compensation under Section 357 of the
\n        Code of Criminal Procedure; or it may be  a  ground  even
\n        for  not imposing fine out of which compensation could be
\n        awarded to the victim.  It is well settled that a finding
\n        by the criminal court is not binding on the civil  court.
\n        Section  357  is  an  exception  to  the said rule to the
\n        limited extent of the  judgment  of  the  criminal  court
\n        being  relevant  for  the  fixation  of  the  quantum  of
\n        compensation in the civil suit for damages.\n<\/p>\n
        \tFor  the  reasons  stated above, I am of the view
\n        that the court  below  was  justified  in  rejecting  the
\n        Indigent O.P.    No  interference  is  called for in this
\n        revision.  The Civil  Revision  Petition  is  accordingly
\n        dismissed.  No order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
.SP 1
\n.JN
\n         \t\t\t\t    (K.T. SANKARAN)@@
\n             AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
\n         \t\t\t\t\t   Judge@@
\n              AAAAAAAA<\/p>\n
         ahz\/
\n.PA
\n………L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T………J
\n((HDR 0<\/p>\n
))
\n.HE 2
\n.JN
\n.SP 2
\n         \t\t\t\t      K.T.SANKARAN, J.@@
\n                  AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA\n<\/p>\n
         \t\t\t\t—————————\n<\/p>\n
         \t\t\t\t—————————\n<\/p>\n
         \t\t\t\t  C.R.P.NO. 1140 OF 1996<\/p>\n
         \t\t\t\t        O R D E R<\/p>\n
         \t\t\t\t      3rd June, 2005\n<\/p>\n
         \t\t\t\t—————————\n<\/p>\n
……..L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T.J<\/p>\n
…..L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T………………………………………..<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court T.A.Krishnan vs Chithran on 3 June, 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM CRP No. 1140 of 1996 1. T.A.KRISHNAN … Petitioner Vs 1. CHITHRAN … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.C.M.NAZAR For Respondent :SRI.VAKKOM N.VIJAYAN The Hon’ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN Dated : 03\/06\/2005 O R D E R ………L…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T…….T……J K.T. SANKARAN, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-21333","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nT.A.Krishnan vs Chithran on 3 June, 2005 - 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\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"T.A.Krishnan vs Chithran on 3 June, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005\" \/>\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=\"2005-06-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-10-21T19:30:42+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=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"T.A.Krishnan vs Chithran on 3 June, 2005\",\"datePublished\":\"2005-06-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-10-21T19:30:42+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005\"},\"wordCount\":2939,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005\",\"name\":\"T.A.Krishnan vs Chithran on 3 June, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2005-06-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-10-21T19:30:42+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"T.A.Krishnan vs Chithran on 3 June, 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":"T.A.Krishnan vs Chithran on 3 June, 2005 - 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\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"T.A.Krishnan vs Chithran on 3 June, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2005-06-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-10-21T19:30:42+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":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"T.A.Krishnan vs Chithran on 3 June, 2005","datePublished":"2005-06-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-10-21T19:30:42+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005"},"wordCount":2939,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005","name":"T.A.Krishnan vs Chithran on 3 June, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2005-06-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-10-21T19:30:42+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-a-krishnan-vs-chithran-on-3-june-2005#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"T.A.Krishnan vs Chithran on 3 June, 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\/21333","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=21333"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21333\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21333"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=21333"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=21333"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}