{"id":217198,"date":"2010-10-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-10-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010"},"modified":"2017-05-23T08:03:54","modified_gmt":"2017-05-23T02:33:54","slug":"v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010","title":{"rendered":"V.D.Sreemathiyamma vs V.D.Radhamma6 on 12 October, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
V.D.Sreemathiyamma vs V.D.Radhamma6 on 12 October, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nSA.No. 631 of 1999(A)\n\n\n\n1. V.D.SREEMATHIYAMMA\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. V.D.RADHAMMA6\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :I.SHEELA DEVI\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.M.NARENDRA KUMAR\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN\n\n Dated :12\/10\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                 S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.\n           --------------------------------------------------\n                       S.A.No.631 of 1999\n            -------------------------------------------------\n           Dated this the 12th day of October, 2010\n\n                           JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
           Defendants 2 to 4 in O.S.No.332\/1987 on the file<\/p>\n
of the Additional Munsiff’s Court, Kottayam are the<\/p>\n
appellants.\n<\/p>\n
           2. The above suit was filed by the 1st respondent<\/p>\n
as plaintiff for a declaration of title and recovery of<\/p>\n
possession.     The 4th defendant in the suit is the 2nd<\/p>\n
respondent in the appeal. Subject matter involved in the<\/p>\n
suit was 3.24 cents of land comprising a building.<\/p>\n
Admittedly, the suit property originally was under the<\/p>\n
occupation of one Itty Devadas. Both the plaintiff and also<\/p>\n
the defendant claimed right over the suit property as the<\/p>\n
legal   heirs    of     Itty    Devadas.        Whereas       the 1st<\/p>\n
respondent\/plaintiff contended that she is the daughter and<\/p>\n
sole legal heir of Itty Devadas, born out of the wedlock with<\/p>\n
Kutty @ Kurumba, defendants 1 to 3 contended that the 1st<\/p>\n
defendant was the wife of Itty Devadas and defendants 2<\/p>\n
S.A.No.631 of 1999<\/p>\n
                            :: 2 ::\n<\/p>\n
\nand 3 are the children of 1st defendant and Itty Devadas.<\/p>\n
Admittedly, 4th defendant was a foster child of Itty Devadas,<\/p>\n
and he is the son of his younger brother. Plaintiff laid the<\/p>\n
suit for declaration of title over the suit property and<\/p>\n
sought for its recovery contending that the 1st defendant<\/p>\n
was only a concubine of late Itty Devadas and defendants 2<\/p>\n
and 3 are not the children of Itty Devadas, and the 4th<\/p>\n
defendant has no right over the suit property. After the<\/p>\n
death of Itty Devadas, the owner of the suit property had<\/p>\n
executed a sale deed (A1) in favour of the plaintiff and also<\/p>\n
defendants 1 to 4 transferring title and possession jointly in<\/p>\n
their favour.   The right conveyed under that sale deed<\/p>\n
would enure only to the legal heir of Itty Devadas, the<\/p>\n
plaintiff, was her case for seeking the declaration over the<\/p>\n
property, as indicated above. The 4th defendant remained<\/p>\n
ex parte.    The other defendants, the present appellants,<\/p>\n
filed a joint written statement, in which they claimed<\/p>\n
absolute right over the suit property and set up a<\/p>\n
claim of kudikidappu as well, contending that the 1st<\/p>\n
S.A.No.631 of 1999<\/p>\n
                              :: 3 ::\n<\/p>\n
\ndefendant has obtained such right over the building and<\/p>\n
premises scheduled in the plaint.           A1 sale deed was<\/p>\n
repudiated by these defendants contending it was executed<\/p>\n
collusively by the previous owner with plaintiff. The claim<\/p>\n
of kudikidappu raised by 1st defendant was referred to the<\/p>\n
Land Tribunal, which, after enquiry, entered a finding that<\/p>\n
the 1st defendant does not have any independent<\/p>\n
kudikidappu right over the plaint schedule property.<\/p>\n
Though both parties have repudiated A1 sale deed, the trial<\/p>\n
court found that the rights of parties are crystallised under<\/p>\n
A1 sale deed and none of them is competent to repudiate<\/p>\n
the transfer effected under that deed. In that view of the<\/p>\n
matter, the trial court granted a declaration to the effect<\/p>\n
that the plaintiff has 1\/5th right over the suit property. After<\/p>\n
passing a declaratory decree, as indicated above, that court<\/p>\n
directed the plaintiff to file a fresh suit for partition to have<\/p>\n
separate possession for 1\/5th share over the suit property.<\/p>\n
The decree so granted by the trial court was challenged by<\/p>\n
the plaintiff reiterating the contentions set up in her suit to<\/p>\n
S.A.No.631 of 1999<\/p>\n
                            :: 4 ::\n<\/p>\n
\nclaim exclusive title and possession over the suit property.<\/p>\n
The    appellate  court,   re-appreciating   the   materials,<\/p>\n
examined the disputed questions involved with reference to<\/p>\n
the legitimacy of the marriage of the 1st defendant with Itty<\/p>\n
Devadas and ultimately arrived at the conclusion that there<\/p>\n
was no valid marriage between them and as such, 1st<\/p>\n
defendant and her children are not entitled to have any<\/p>\n
share in the suit property. Placing reliance on the decision<\/p>\n
reported in Kallyani Amma v. Devi {1989 (2) KLT 80},<\/p>\n
which has been since reversed, it was held that defendants<\/p>\n
2 and 3 are not entitled to the benefit of Section 16 of the<\/p>\n
Hindu Marriage Act to claim any right over the property as<\/p>\n
the illegitimate children of Itty Devadas. In that view of the<\/p>\n
matter, modifying the decree of the trial court, a decree<\/p>\n
was granted in favour of the plaintiff by the lower appellate<\/p>\n
court as applied for in her suit. Defendants 2 and 3 have<\/p>\n
challenged that decree by preferring this appeal.<\/p>\n
            3. I heard the counsel on both sides. Having<\/p>\n
regard to the submissions made and also perusing the<\/p>\n
S.A.No.631 of 1999<\/p>\n
                            :: 5 ::\n<\/p>\n
\njudgments rendered by both the courts with reference to<\/p>\n
the materials tendered, I find, the question whether the 1st<\/p>\n
defendant was the legally wedded wife of Itty Devadas and<\/p>\n
her children defendants 2 and 3 are the legitimate or<\/p>\n
illegitimate children of Itty Devadas has no significance, in<\/p>\n
the given facts of the case, where title over the property by<\/p>\n
virtue of A1 sale deed executed by the previous Jenmi<\/p>\n
vested on both parties jointly. Though the plaintiff and also<\/p>\n
defendants 1 to 3 have challenged the validity of A1 sale<\/p>\n
deed, the former contending that it has no legal sanctity<\/p>\n
and defendants 1 to 4 are not the legal heirs of Itty<\/p>\n
Devadas and the latter impeaching that deed as a collusive<\/p>\n
and fraudulent transaction at the instance of the plaintiff<\/p>\n
with the prior owner, as rightly and correctly found by the<\/p>\n
trial court, A1 registered sale deed, in the absence of a<\/p>\n
challenge and further a declaration for setting aside or<\/p>\n
cancelling such document, can never be ignored or be<\/p>\n
treated as nullified on the rival case presented by the<\/p>\n
partiies. Though the plaintiff has impeached A1 sale deed<\/p>\n
S.A.No.631 of 1999<\/p>\n
                            :: 6 ::\n<\/p>\n
\ncontending that she alone is the legal heir of Itty Devadas<\/p>\n
entitled to the suit property, it has to be noted that in the<\/p>\n
suit she has not moved for cancelling that sale deed. In the<\/p>\n
absence of a specific prayer for cancellation of that<\/p>\n
document, and further establishing that case, merely by<\/p>\n
alleging that the document executed by the Jenmi in favour<\/p>\n
of the plaintiff and defendants has no value or legal<\/p>\n
sanctity, the case canvassed by the plaintiff can never be<\/p>\n
entertained. In Prem Singh and others v. Birbal and<\/p>\n
others<\/a> {2006(5) SCC 353}, the Apex Court has<\/p>\n
considered    the    difference    between    a   fraudulent<\/p>\n
misrepresentation as regards the character of a document<\/p>\n
and    also  as   to   its   contents.   In  the   case    of<\/p>\n
misrepresentation, as regards the contents of a document,<\/p>\n
it has been held that the document is only voidable. But in<\/p>\n
the case of misrepresentation, as regards the character,<\/p>\n
the document is void. As the plaintiff has impeached A1<\/p>\n
sale deed with reference to the fraudulent nature of the<\/p>\n
contents of the document, but not of its character, it was<\/p>\n
S.A.No.631 of 1999<\/p>\n
                              :: 7 ::\n<\/p>\n
\nonly voidable, even assuming that the plaintiff’s case is<\/p>\n
true, by seeking its cancellation. That having not been<\/p>\n
done and the document A1 sale deed which, at the most,<\/p>\n
was voidable remains unimpeached, it follows that it is<\/p>\n
binding on the plaintiff.       Such being the position, the<\/p>\n
finding entered by the trial court acting upon A1 sale deed,<\/p>\n
though not on the above reasoning, that the plaintiff is<\/p>\n
entitled to 1\/5th share in the suit property and not to<\/p>\n
exclusive title and possession, is unimpeachable. The trial<\/p>\n
court, after granting such a decree has directed the<\/p>\n
plaintiff to work out her remedy to have separate<\/p>\n
possession filing a suit for partition. Even in a declaratory<\/p>\n
suit if it is so found, it is competent for the court to pass a<\/p>\n
preliminary decree for partition subject to further<\/p>\n
directions as may be required including remittance of court<\/p>\n
fee, if any, needed with respect to the valuation of the suit.<\/p>\n
It would be pointless to drive either party to a fresh suit for<\/p>\n
partition, where a preliminary decree for partition in terms<\/p>\n
of the declaration of right found can be granted in the<\/p>\n
S.A.No.631 of 1999<\/p>\n
                            :: 8 ::\n<\/p>\n
\npresent suit (see Vadekannu v. Kuttathi and others<\/p>\n
{1960 (II) K.L.R. 258}. A fresh suit, for partition, no<\/p>\n
doubt would take its own time, for passing an effective<\/p>\n
decree. So much so, the decree granted by the trial court<\/p>\n
shall stand modified to the effect that it shall be treated as<\/p>\n
a preliminary decree allowing the plaintiff to have 1\/5th<\/p>\n
share in the suit property, with liberty to work out the<\/p>\n
actual division and separate possession in the final decree<\/p>\n
proceedings.    It is also open to the defendants, if so<\/p>\n
interested, to move for passing of another preliminary<\/p>\n
decree for allotment of their share, remitting the court fee<\/p>\n
payable thereof.\n<\/p>\n
          Appeal is disposed of as indicated above,<\/p>\n
directing both sides to suffer their costs.<\/p>\n
                                               Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
                                      (S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN)
\n                                              JUDGE
\nsk\/-\n<\/p>\n
           \/\/true copy\/\/<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court V.D.Sreemathiyamma vs V.D.Radhamma6 on 12 October, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM SA.No. 631 of 1999(A) 1. V.D.SREEMATHIYAMMA … Petitioner Vs 1. V.D.RADHAMMA6 … Respondent For Petitioner :I.SHEELA DEVI For Respondent :SRI.M.NARENDRA KUMAR The Hon’ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN Dated :12\/10\/2010 O R D E R S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ————————————————– S.A.No.631 […]<\/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-217198","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nV.D.Sreemathiyamma vs V.D.Radhamma6 on 12 October, 2010 - 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\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"V.D.Sreemathiyamma vs V.D.Radhamma6 on 12 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-05-23T02:33:54+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\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"V.D.Sreemathiyamma vs V.D.Radhamma6 on 12 October, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-23T02:33:54+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1429,\"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\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010\",\"name\":\"V.D.Sreemathiyamma vs V.D.Radhamma6 on 12 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-23T02:33:54+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"V.D.Sreemathiyamma vs V.D.Radhamma6 on 12 October, 2010\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"V.D.Sreemathiyamma vs V.D.Radhamma6 on 12 October, 2010 - 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\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"V.D.Sreemathiyamma vs V.D.Radhamma6 on 12 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-05-23T02:33:54+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\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"V.D.Sreemathiyamma vs V.D.Radhamma6 on 12 October, 2010","datePublished":"2010-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-23T02:33:54+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010"},"wordCount":1429,"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\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010","name":"V.D.Sreemathiyamma vs V.D.Radhamma6 on 12 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-23T02:33:54+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-d-sreemathiyamma-vs-v-d-radhamma6-on-12-october-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"V.D.Sreemathiyamma vs V.D.Radhamma6 on 12 October, 2010"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/217198","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=217198"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/217198\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=217198"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=217198"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=217198"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}