{"id":221784,"date":"2009-12-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-12-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009"},"modified":"2017-03-05T11:54:54","modified_gmt":"2017-03-05T06:24:54","slug":"bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009","title":{"rendered":"Bhargavi vs Vijayan on 23 December, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Bhargavi vs Vijayan on 23 December, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRSA.No. 1337 of 2009()\n\n\n1. BHARGAVI,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. ANILAN, S\/O.BHARGAVI,\n3. SUNILAN, S\/O.BHARGAVI,\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. VIJAYAN, S\/O.OOTTUKAZHIYIL NARAYANAN,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.P.SUDHEER\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH\n\n Dated :23\/12\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                       THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.\n             = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =\n                          R.S.A. NO.1337 of 2009\n             = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =\n             Dated this the 23rd    day of December,      2009\n\n\n                             J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
                             ———————-\n<\/p>\n
\n      This Second Appeal arises from judgment and decree in A.S.<\/p>\n
No.323 of 2007 of     learned Second Additional Sub Judge, Thrissur<\/p>\n
confirming judgment and decree in O.S. No.6 of 2002 of learned<\/p>\n
Munsiff, Wadakkancherry. Respondent sued appellants for a decree<\/p>\n
for recovery of possession on the strength of title. According to the<\/p>\n
respondent plaint A schedule described as 5= cents comprised in<\/p>\n
Sy.No.775\/2 belonged to him. On the north of that property is the<\/p>\n
property of appellants comprised in Sy.No.775\/1. It is the case of<\/p>\n
respondent that at a time when he was out of station on<\/p>\n
17.11.2001       appellants trespassed into the northern portion of<\/p>\n
plaint A schedule and reduced that portion into their possession<\/p>\n
which is described in the plaint B schedule. That portion is sought<\/p>\n
to be recovered on the strength of title.           Appellants denied the<\/p>\n
allegation of encroachment and claimed that respondent is having<\/p>\n
more extent than what is stated in his title deed. It is contended<\/p>\n
that there is no boundary between the two properties. It is also<\/p>\n
contended that plaint B schedule does not form part of plaint A<\/p>\n
R.S.A. No.1337 of 2009
\n                                 -: 2 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
schedule and at any rate appellants have perfected title over plaint<\/p>\n
B schedule by adverse possession and the law of limitation.      Trial<\/p>\n
court found in favour of the respondent with respect to title of plaint<\/p>\n
B schedule property against the appellants in their plea of adverse<\/p>\n
possession and limitation and granted a decree in favour of the<\/p>\n
respondent.       Challenging that judgment and decree appellants<\/p>\n
filed appeal but in vain.    Hence this Appeal. It is contended by<\/p>\n
learned counsel for appellants that respondent cannot win on the<\/p>\n
weakness of the case of appellants this being a suit on title and<\/p>\n
placed reliance on the decisions in Narayana Iyer v. Vella<\/p>\n
(1988 [1] KLT 856) and Ramachandra Sakharam Mahajan<\/p>\n
v. Damodar Trimbak Tanksale<\/a> ([2007] 6 SCC 737). It is<\/p>\n
also submitted by learned counsel that in the first appellate court<\/p>\n
two applications were filed; one for reception of additional evidence<\/p>\n
and the other, for appointment of a fresh Commissioner to measure<\/p>\n
the properties with reference to documents of title and with the<\/p>\n
assistance of the Taluk Surveyor. First appellate court dismissed<\/p>\n
those applications and the appeal. That according to the learned<\/p>\n
counsel, is illegal.\n<\/p>\n
      2.    There could be no dispute that in a suit on title plaintiff<\/p>\n
has to win on the strength of his title and that weakness of case of<\/p>\n
R.S.A. No.1337 of 2009
\n                                   -: 3 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
defendant is no ground to grant relief in favour of the plaintiff. In<\/p>\n
the present       case respondent claimed title over the disputed<\/p>\n
property as per Ext.A1 and produced Ext.A2, purchase certificate to<\/p>\n
prove payment of revenue for the said property. According to the<\/p>\n
respondent his entitlement is in Sy.No.775\/2.      I have gone through<\/p>\n
the copy of written statement filed by the appellants and given to<\/p>\n
me for perusal by the learned counsel.         Nowhere in the written<\/p>\n
statement it is pleaded that appellants have any inch of land       in<\/p>\n
Sy.No.775\/2.      Claim of appellants is only in Sy.No.775\/1. There is<\/p>\n
also no dispute regarding survey number or re-survey number as the<\/p>\n
case may be. Therefore claim of appellants must be confined to the<\/p>\n
property comprised in Sy.No.775\/1. There is also dispute regarding<\/p>\n
survey number or re-survey number as the case may be. A further<\/p>\n
fact to be noted is that appellants did not produce their document of<\/p>\n
title in the trial court nor was any document made available to the<\/p>\n
Commissioner at the time of inspection.        Commissioner measured<\/p>\n
the properties with the assistance of the Taluk Surveyor and<\/p>\n
prepared Exts.C1, C1(a), C2 and C2(a), reports and plans.<\/p>\n
Commissioner has shown the disputed property as plot B in Ext.C2<\/p>\n
(a) measuring 587\/1000 cent and falling in Sy.No.775\/2 in which<\/p>\n
admittedly respondent owns property and in which survey number<\/p>\n
R.S.A. No.1337 of 2009
\n                                 -: 4 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
appellants have no claim.      Commissioner has also found after<\/p>\n
measurement of the property that disputed property formed part of<\/p>\n
plaint A schedule belonging to the respondent.         Entitlement of<\/p>\n
appellants is only over the property comprised in Sy.No.775\/1 which<\/p>\n
admittedly is situated on the north of the disputed plaint B schedule.<\/p>\n
It is true that on measurement it is found that respondent is entitled<\/p>\n
to more extent than stated in Ext.A1, by cents and measurements<\/p>\n
but descriptions in Ext.A1 and plaint A schedule tallied with the<\/p>\n
descriptions given by the Advocate Commissioner as regards the<\/p>\n
boundaries and survey number, inconsistency being only as regards<\/p>\n
the extent.     It has been held by this Court in Savithri Amma<\/p>\n
Vilasini Amma v. Jayaram Pillai Padmavathy Amma<\/a><\/p>\n
(1989 [2] KLJ 709)     that when there is conflict between survey<\/p>\n
number, extent, measurement, boundaries, etc.,           there is no<\/p>\n
invariable rule that one should prevail over other, it is a matter of<\/p>\n
construction of the document and that one which is clearer and<\/p>\n
specific has to be preferred.     In Parameswaran           Pillai v.<\/p>\n
Gowrikutty Amma<\/a> (1984 KLT SN Case No.111) description<\/p>\n
by fixed boundaries was preferred to description by area. In the<\/p>\n
present case appellants have no claim over sy.No.775\/2 in which<\/p>\n
R.S.A. No.1337 of 2009
\n                                   -: 5 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
plaint A schedule lies and plaint B schedule is found to be. In the<\/p>\n
present case descriptions by boundaries and survey number tallied<\/p>\n
which was preferred over extent.          It is also seen that of the 43<\/p>\n
cents belonging to the appellants in Sy.No.775\/1 they have sold 16<<\/p>\n
cents to one Velayudhan and even excluding plaint B schedule,<\/p>\n
appellants are in possession of more extent than they are entitled<\/p>\n
to, by half a cent. Therefore it is not as if the disputed property<\/p>\n
forms part of the property of the appellants.\n<\/p>\n
      3.     As to the applications preferred before the first appellate<\/p>\n
court; one was for reception of additional evidence. It is a case<\/p>\n
where respondent produced his documents,           claimed title and the<\/p>\n
Advocate Commissioner after measurement found that disputed<\/p>\n
property forms part of the property of the respondent. Documents if<\/p>\n
relevant for enquiry ought to have been produced by the appellants<\/p>\n
in the trail court. So far as the request for fresh measurement of the<\/p>\n
properties is concerned, it is not as if court can call for successive<\/p>\n
reports. A second report can be called for when the first report is<\/p>\n
not acceptable or further materials are necessary to be obtained for<\/p>\n
disposal of the case. None of those situations arise in this case.<\/p>\n
In these circumstances courts below are justified in finding title as<\/p>\n
pleaded by the respondent. On the evidence on record, the plea of<\/p>\n
R.S.A. No.1337 of 2009
\n                                 -: 6 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
adverse possession was also negatived.    No substantial question of<\/p>\n
law as urged is involved requiring admission of this Second Appeal.<\/p>\n
      Second Appeal is dismissed in limine.\n<\/p>\n
      Interlocutory   Application  No.3068   of  2009    shall stand<\/p>\n
dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                        THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
vsv<\/p>\n
R.S.A. No.1337 of 2009
\n                          -: 7 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
                                  THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.\n<\/p>\n
                               ===================
\n                                  R.S.A. NO.1337 OF 2009
\n                               ===================<\/p>\n
                                    J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n
                                 23RD DECEMBER, 2009<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Bhargavi vs Vijayan on 23 December, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RSA.No. 1337 of 2009() 1. BHARGAVI, … Petitioner 2. ANILAN, S\/O.BHARGAVI, 3. SUNILAN, S\/O.BHARGAVI, Vs 1. VIJAYAN, S\/O.OOTTUKAZHIYIL NARAYANAN, … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.K.P.SUDHEER For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon’ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH Dated :23\/12\/2009 […]<\/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-221784","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nBhargavi vs Vijayan on 23 December, 2009 - 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\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bhargavi vs Vijayan on 23 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-12-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-03-05T06:24:54+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bhargavi vs Vijayan on 23 December, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-05T06:24:54+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1182,\"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\\\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009\",\"name\":\"Bhargavi vs Vijayan on 23 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-05T06:24:54+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bhargavi vs Vijayan on 23 December, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Bhargavi vs Vijayan on 23 December, 2009 - 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\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bhargavi vs Vijayan on 23 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-12-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-03-05T06:24:54+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bhargavi vs Vijayan on 23 December, 2009","datePublished":"2009-12-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-05T06:24:54+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009"},"wordCount":1182,"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\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009","name":"Bhargavi vs Vijayan on 23 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-12-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-05T06:24:54+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-vijayan-on-23-december-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bhargavi vs Vijayan on 23 December, 2009"}]},{"@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\/221784","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=221784"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221784\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=221784"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=221784"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=221784"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}