{"id":220935,"date":"2010-02-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010"},"modified":"2014-08-22T06:47:49","modified_gmt":"2014-08-22T01:17:49","slug":"kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"Kamala Saraswathi vs Rajagopal on 11 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Kamala Saraswathi vs Rajagopal on 11 February, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRSA.No. 127 of 2010()\n\n\n1. KAMALA SARASWATHI\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. RAJAGOPAL\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE SECRETARY\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K.\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH\n\n Dated :11\/02\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                              THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J.\n                            --------------------------------------\n                               R.S.A.No.127 of 2010\n                            --------------------------------------\n                    Dated this the 11th day of February, 2010.\n\n                                      JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
       Second      Appeal arises      from judgment and decree of learned First<\/p>\n
Additional District Judge, Palakkad in A.S.No.270 of 2004 confirming judgment<\/p>\n
and decree of learned Munsiff, Chittur in O.S.No.321 of 2003.         Respondent<\/p>\n
No.1\/plaintiff is the brother of appellant\/defendant No.2. They are the children of<\/p>\n
late Vadivel Chettiar who died on 4.9.2002. In the year 1999 Vadivel Chittiar<\/p>\n
had opened a fixed deposit account with respondent No.2\/defendant No.1 which<\/p>\n
matured by 2004. In the year 1996 Vadivel Chettiar along with his wife and<\/p>\n
children executed Ext.A4, partition deed as per which the properties were divided<\/p>\n
among Vadivel Chettiar and respondent No.1. He died on 4.9.2002. Thereafter<\/p>\n
respondent NO.1 instituted the suit setting up Ext.A2, unregistered Will dated<\/p>\n
3.3.2002 allegedly executed by the late Vadivel Chettiar and seeking declaration<\/p>\n
of his right over the properties dealt with thereby. He prayed for a decree for<\/p>\n
injunction to restrain appellant from withdrawing the amount in the fixed deposit<\/p>\n
on the strength of her nomination made by deceased Vadivel Chettiar.<\/p>\n
Respondent No.2\/defendant No.1, the banker contended that there was a fixed<\/p>\n
deposit account opened by the deceased Vadivel Chettiar with appellant as<\/p>\n
nominee and normal practice is to pay the amount to the nominee on death of<\/p>\n
account holder.       Appellant denied execution of the unregistered Will and<\/p>\n
contended that it is the result of forgery. According to her, Vadivel Chettiar was<\/p>\n
RSA No.127\/2010<\/p>\n
                                         2<\/span><\/p>\n
suffering from various illness and about a year before his death respondent No.1<\/p>\n
demanded Vadivel Chettiar to transfer the amount in the fixed deposit as well as<\/p>\n
his other movable and immovable properties which Vadivel Chettiar refused and<\/p>\n
since then Vadivel Chettiar and respondent No.1 were not talking in terms. She<\/p>\n
contended that respondent No.1 has no right over the movable or immovable<\/p>\n
properties referred to in the disputed Will. Trial court after recording evidence<\/p>\n
reached the conclusion that due attestation and execution of Ext.A2 are proved<\/p>\n
and accordingly granted a decree in favour of respondent No.1. First appellate<\/p>\n
court confirmed it. Hence the Second Appeal urging the following substantial<\/p>\n
questions of law:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       i.    Whether Ext.A2, Will is legally and properly executed and is<\/p>\n
sustainable in law?\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       ii.   Whether       propounder has succeeded in          establishing due<\/p>\n
attestation and execution of Ext.A2, Will beyond reasonable doubt?<\/p>\n
It is contended by learned counsel for appellant\/defendant No.2 that due<\/p>\n
attestation and execution of Ext.A2 which is not even registered is not proved<\/p>\n
and that there are suspicious circumstances concerning alleged execution of Will<\/p>\n
which the propounder was not able to remove. According to the learned counsel<\/p>\n
courts below ought not to have upheld production of Ext.A2, Will.<\/p>\n
RSA No.127\/2010<\/p>\n
                                           3<\/span><\/p>\n
       2.     So far as proof of due attestation and execution of the Will is<\/p>\n
concerned the settled position of law is that as in the case of other documents in<\/p>\n
the case of Will also, proof with arithematical precision          is not required.<\/p>\n
Respondent No.1 has put up Ext.A2, Will dated 3.3.2002. True, the Will is not<\/p>\n
registered but it is not contended that as per the law in force a Will requires<\/p>\n
registration compulsorily. Nor is registration a substitute for evidence of due<\/p>\n
execution and attestation of the Will.        At the same time registration is a<\/p>\n
circumstance which could be taken into account along with other circumstance in<\/p>\n
favour of due execution of the Will. As Ext.A2 is not registered proof in that way<\/p>\n
is not available.  Still it is required to be decided whether there is evidence of<\/p>\n
due execution and attestation of Ext.A2.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       3.     Respondent No.1 has given evidence as PW1. According to him<\/p>\n
he was not aware of the Will at the time of death of his father on 4.9.2002 and<\/p>\n
learnt about the Will only three months after death of the father. He did not say<\/p>\n
the specific date when he learnt about the disputed Will. PWs 3 and 4 are<\/p>\n
attestors in Ext.A2 and PW2 is the scribe. PW5 is a close friend of the<\/p>\n
deceased. According to PWs 2 to 5, the Will was executed and attested at the<\/p>\n
house of PW5. They have given evidence that instruction for preparation of the<\/p>\n
Will was given to PW2 by deceased Vadivel Chettiar. Evidence of PWs 3 and<\/p>\n
4 refers to due attestation and execution of the Will as provided under law.<\/p>\n
RSA No.127\/2010<\/p>\n
                                        4<\/span><\/p>\n
       4.    Contra evidence is given by the appellant\/defendant No.1 as DW2.<\/p>\n
She stated that the Will is the result of forgery and that Vadivel Chettiar was<\/p>\n
suffering from several illness since about a year before his death on 4.9.2002.<\/p>\n
Though she stated that Will is the result of forgery, on going through the<\/p>\n
deposition of appellant as DW2 I do not find any challenge to the signature of<\/p>\n
the executant in Ext.A2. Moreover, it is seen from the written statement that<\/p>\n
appellant has raised a contention that immediately after the death of Vadivel<\/p>\n
Chettiar respondent No.1 collected documents including fixed deposit receipt<\/p>\n
and signed paper left by the deceased. Though she contended that Vadivel<\/p>\n
Chettiar was suffering from various illness she has no case that Vadivel Chettiar<\/p>\n
was not having sound disposing state of mind during the time of execution of<\/p>\n
Ext.A2. No such contention is raised either in the written statement or in her<\/p>\n
evidence as DW2.        I stated that there is no challenge to the signature of<\/p>\n
Vadivel Chettiar in Ext.A2.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
             5.     The suspicious circumstance pointed out by the learned<\/p>\n
counsel for appellant before me is with reference to Exts.B5 to B9. It has come<\/p>\n
in evidence through Exts.B5 to B9 that Vadivel Chettiar had obtained decree in<\/p>\n
O.S.No.552 of 2001 and filed E.P.No.311 of 2002. It is while that execution<\/p>\n
petition was pending that Vadivel Chettiar expired. Thereafter respondent<\/p>\n
No.1, appellant and their mother filed E.A.No.38 of 2003 in the executing court<\/p>\n
on 13.1.2003 (its CC is Ext.B5) seeking their impleadment as               legal<\/p>\n
RSA No.127\/2010<\/p>\n
                                        5<\/span><\/p>\n
representatives of the deceased Vadivel Chettiar (as if there was no<\/p>\n
testamentary succession). Ext.B6 is the copy of application for consequential<\/p>\n
amendment and Ext.B7 is the copy of application for condonation of delay in<\/p>\n
filing the application for impleadment.   Ext.B8 is the copy of application dated<\/p>\n
15.3.2003 filed by respondent No.1 in the same court seeking his impleadment<\/p>\n
as legal representative on the strength of Ext.A2 and Ext.B9 is the CC of<\/p>\n
consequent amendment application. Argument advanced by learned counsel for<\/p>\n
appellant is that if the Will was allegedly executed on 3.3.2002 and Vadivel<\/p>\n
Chettiar died on 4.9.2002 respondent No.1 would not have along with appellant<\/p>\n
and their mother filed Ext.B5, E.A.No.38 of 2003 on 13.1.2003 claiming to be<\/p>\n
legal representative of the deceased Vadivel Chettiar.    It is seen from Exts.B8<\/p>\n
and B9 that on 15.3.2003 respondent filed an application for his impleadment<\/p>\n
as legal representative on the strength of Ext.A2, the disputed Will. PW1 has<\/p>\n
given explanation that at the time of Exts.B5 to B7 he was not aware of the Will.<\/p>\n
Therefore    failure to put up Ext.A2 by respondent No.1 while applying for<\/p>\n
impleadment as per Ext.B5 dated 13.1.2003 is not fatal, nor a suspicious<\/p>\n
circumstance.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
        6.    Another circumstance which according to the learned counsel is<\/p>\n
suspicious is disinheritance    of appellant and her mother while Ext.A2 was<\/p>\n
allegedly executed.     True, it is seen from Ext.A2 that Vadivel Chettiar has<\/p>\n
bequeathed all his movable and immovable properties including the fixed deposit<\/p>\n
RSA No.127\/2010<\/p>\n
                                          6<\/span><\/p>\n
in favour of respondent No.1. Trial court has referred to the relevant decisions<\/p>\n
on the point and held that the mere fact of disinheritance of appellant and her<\/p>\n
mother by itself cannot be a suspicious circumstance.    I must bear in mind that<\/p>\n
the very object of executing a Will is to interfere with the normal line of<\/p>\n
succession. Therefore mere fact that the normal line of succession is interfered<\/p>\n
with as per Ext.A2 by itself cannot be a suspicious circumstance. There are<\/p>\n
also circumstances proved in the case to show why appellant and mother were<\/p>\n
excluded from inheritance as per Ext.A2. Even in Ext.A4, partition deed the<\/p>\n
testator did not allot any share to his wife. Hence there is nothing strange in his<\/p>\n
excluding the wife as per Ext.A2.     Evidence of DW2 would show that appellant<\/p>\n
was sent in marriage much prior to the execution of Ext.A4 and that the testator<\/p>\n
met all expenses in connection with the marriage. It is also in evidence that her<\/p>\n
husband has eight acres of land.       Thus there is evidence that appellant was<\/p>\n
sent in marriage by the deceased into a financially well placed family.       That<\/p>\n
could be the reason why the deceased wanted to disinherit the appellant while<\/p>\n
executing Ext.A2. Therefore fact of disinheritance of appellant and mother is<\/p>\n
no suspicious circumstance regarding execution of Ext.A2.<\/p>\n
       7.     Another ‘suspicious circumstance’ pointed out is that as against the<\/p>\n
Will being prepared at the residence of the deceased or at the office of the scribe<\/p>\n
it was prepared at the residence of PW5. It has come in evidence that PW5 was<\/p>\n
a close confident of the deceased. It has also come in evidence that he is one<\/p>\n
of the witnesses in Ext.A4, partition deed.        In the circumstance that the<\/p>\n
RSA No.127\/2010<\/p>\n
                                       7<\/span><\/p>\n
document was executed and attested at the house of PW5 is also not a<\/p>\n
suspicious circumstance.\n<\/p>\n
      8.     Any and every circumstance cannot be ‘suspicious circumstance’.<\/p>\n
A circumstance would be suspicious if in the normal course the testator would<\/p>\n
not have done so. No such circumstance exist in this case. Courts below have<\/p>\n
considered the evidence and come to the conclusion that Ext.A2 is the Will<\/p>\n
executed by deceased Vadivel Chettiar with sound disposing state of mind and<\/p>\n
duly attested by the witnesses. If that be so respondent No.1 is entitled to a<\/p>\n
decree as prayed for notwithstanding that appellant is made the nominee. As<\/p>\n
per law a nominee can only collect the amount on behalf of the legal<\/p>\n
representative.  On going through the judgments under challenge and hearing<\/p>\n
learned counsel I do not find any substantial question of law involved in this<\/p>\n
Second Appeal requiring decision.\n<\/p>\n
      Resultantly, the Second Appeal is dismissed in limine.<\/p>\n
      I.A.No.297 of 2010 will stand dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                             THOMAS P.JOSEPH,
\n                                                     Judge.\n<\/p>\n
cks<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Kamala Saraswathi vs Rajagopal on 11 February, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RSA.No. 127 of 2010() 1. KAMALA SARASWATHI … Petitioner Vs 1. RAJAGOPAL … Respondent 2. THE SECRETARY For Petitioner :SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K. For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon’ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH Dated :11\/02\/2010 O […]<\/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-220935","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nKamala Saraswathi vs Rajagopal on 11 February, 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\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kamala Saraswathi vs Rajagopal on 11 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-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=\"2010-02-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-08-22T01:17:49+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kamala Saraswathi vs Rajagopal on 11 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-08-22T01:17:49+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1711,\"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\\\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010\",\"name\":\"Kamala Saraswathi vs Rajagopal on 11 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-08-22T01:17:49+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kamala Saraswathi vs Rajagopal on 11 February, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"Kamala Saraswathi vs Rajagopal on 11 February, 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\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kamala Saraswathi vs Rajagopal on 11 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-08-22T01:17:49+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kamala Saraswathi vs Rajagopal on 11 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-08-22T01:17:49+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010"},"wordCount":1711,"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\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010","name":"Kamala Saraswathi vs Rajagopal on 11 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-08-22T01:17:49+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamala-saraswathi-vs-rajagopal-on-11-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kamala Saraswathi vs Rajagopal on 11 February, 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:\/\/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\/220935","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=220935"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220935\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=220935"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=220935"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=220935"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}