{"id":224207,"date":"2004-03-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-03-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004"},"modified":"2018-04-14T07:06:08","modified_gmt":"2018-04-14T01:36:08","slug":"ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004","title":{"rendered":"M\/S.Central Bank Of India vs J. Maria Jesu Kennady on 25 March, 2004"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
M\/S.Central Bank Of India vs J. Maria Jesu Kennady on 25 March, 2004<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDated: 25\/03\/2004\n\nCoram\n\nThe Honourable Mr. Justice T.V. MASILAMANI\n\nC.R.P.(NPD)No.1474 of 1998\n\n\nM\/s.Central Bank of India,\nrep. by its Branch Manager,\nVirudhunagar.                           .. Petitioner\n\n-Vs-\n\n1. J. Maria Jesu Kennady\n2. J.Anthoniammal\n3. R. Madasamy\n4. Margaret @ Margaret Mary\n5. R.M.Selvaraj\n6. Amuthapushpam\n7. Inbakkani\n8. R.M.Ganesan\n9. M.Mareeswari\n10.R.M.Nagarajan\n11.R.M.Anantharajan\n12.M.Chitra Devi                                                              .. Respondents\n\n\n        Civil Revision Petition against the fair and decretal orders  dated  5\n.8.1997  in  I.A.No.305  of  1997  in  O.S.No.196  of  1996 on the file of the\nSubordinate Judge, Virudhunagar.\n\n!For Petitioner :  Mr.T.V.Sivakumar\n\n^For Respondents :  N.A.\n\n:O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
        The revision petition is  filed  challenging  the  fair  and  decretal
\norders passed by the Subordinate Judge, Virudhunagar in I.A.No.305 of 19 97 in
\nO.S.No.196 of 1996 dated 5.8.1997.\n<\/p>\n
        2.  The revision petitioner is the nationalised bank and as plaintiff,
\nthe  bank  filed  the  said  suit  on  the  file  of  the  Subordinate  Judge,
\nVirudhunagar   for   recovery   of   the   mortgage   money   due   from   the
\nrespondents\/defendants  on  the basis of the registered mortgage deed executed
\nby the defendants in favour of the plaintiff for a sum of Rs.7,50,600 -85 with
\ninterest and costs.  A preliminary decree was passed on  13.1  1.1996  wherein
\nthe  Pleader’s  fees  had  been  calculated  as per Rule 3(2 )(a) of the Legal
\nPractitioners Fees Rules, 1973 and  a  sum  of  Rs.10,0  56\/-  towards  senior
\nadvocate’s fees and Rs.3,352\/- as Junior advocate’s fees had been taxed as per
\nthe  cost  memo  filed  by the plaintiff, even though a sum of Rs.16,656\/- and
\nRs.5,559\/- had been claimed by the plaintiff towards the fees payable  by  the
\ndefendants to the senior advocate and the junior advocate respectively.  Hence
\nthe  revision petitioner was constrained to file the said application to award
\nthe schedule fees in accordance with the provision under Rule 3(2)(b)  of  the
\nsaid Rules.    The learned Subordinate Judge having analysed the facts and the
\nprovisions of law dismissed the application.  Hence, the revision.\n<\/p>\n
        3.  The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued  at  the  outset
\nthat  the trial Court was not correct in holding that the legal practitioner’s
\nfee in this case has be calculated under Rule 3(2)(a) which is applicable only
\nwith regard to suits for  money  based  on  negotiable  instrument  and  loan.
\nMoreover,  he has contended that the proper provision is Rule 3(2)(b) which is
\napplicable to the suits based on mortgage deed.  He has also  pointed  out  in
\nthis  connection that the procedure followed by the Subordinate Courts in this
\nregard is not uniform and therefore it has become necessary to decide  whether
\nthe  advocate  fees  taxed  by  the Court below is in accordance with the said
\nRules.\n<\/p>\n
        4.  It is essential to extract Rules 3(2)(a)  and  (b)  of  the  Legal
\nPractitioners’  Fees  Rules,  1973 to appreciate the question involved in this
\ncase as under:-\n<\/p>\n
        “In Courts Subordinate to the High Court, in suits for money,  effects
\nor  other  personal  property  or  for land or other immovable property of any
\ndescription, fees to legal practitioners shall be  payable  on  the  following
\nscale:-\n<\/p>\n
        (1) ..  ..\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
        (2) Original Suits:-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                (a) for money based on negotiable instruments and loans:-
\n..  ..<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                (b)  Other  original Suits not falling under sub-clause (a) of
\nclause (2).\n<\/p>\n
                ..  ..          ”\n<\/p>\n
        5.  In this context, it is relevant to mention that the suit filed  by
\nthe  revision  petitioner  was  not  based  on  a  negotiable  instrument  and
\ntherefore, it is essential to find out whether the suit was based on any  loan
\ntransaction as  per the said Rules.  In effect, the question for consideration
\nis whether the principal and interest secured under mortgage is a loan  within
\nthe meaning of the said term.\n<\/p>\n
        6.  The dictionary meaning of the term ‘loan’ as given in “THE CONCISE
\nOXFORD DICTIONARY (10th Edition)is as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
“A  thing  that  is borrowed, especially a sum of money that is expected to be
\npaid back with interest; the action of lending.”\n<\/p>\n
Similarly, P.RAMANATHA AIYER’s “THE LAW LEXICON” (2nd  Edition  1997)  defines
\n“loan” as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
“Loan  means  a loan whether of money or in kind, and included any transaction
\nwhich is in the opinion of the Court, in substance a loan.    Act  X  of  1918
\n(Usurious Loans), S.2(2)”\n<\/p>\n
Again  if  one has to find out the nature of money being the subject matter of
\nloan, the LAW LEXICON provides the definition of “loan of money” as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
“By a loan of money, is meant the delivery by one party …  and  the  receipt
\nby the  other  party ….  of a given sum of money, upon an agreement, express
\nor implied, to repay the sum loaned with or without interest.”\n<\/p>\n
        7.  In this context, it is necessary to refer to the case law on  this
\npoint  with reference to Section 2(2) of the Usurious Loans Act, 1918 so as to
\nfind out whether the mortgage transaction falls within the meaning of the term
\nloan.  Section 2(2) of the said Act defines ” loan” as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
“‘Loan’ means a loan whether of money or in kind and includes any  transaction
\nwhich is, in the opinion of the Court, in substance a loan.”\n<\/p>\n
        8.  In case of usufructuary mortgage, it was held that the transaction
\nwhereby  the  mortgage  money was secured originally would not fall within the
\ndefinition of a  loan  under  Sections  2  and  3  of  the  Punjab  Relief  of
\nIndebtedness Act, 1934 (vide) AIR 1996 PUNJAB & HARIYANA 60 (M\/S.GOODWIL INDIA
\nLTD v.  M\/S.P.S.B.  PAPER MILLS PVT LTD).\n<\/p>\n
        9.   In  another decision in AIR 1955 NUC (MAD) 3187 (VEDACHAL NAICKER
\nv.  MAHADEVA MUDALIAR AND OTHERS),<\/a> it was held as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
        “In order to constitute a loan it is not necessary that  money  should
\nbe handed over by the lender to the borrower, but is essential that the lender
\nmust  find  and  part  with his money and though he may not transfer it to the
\nborrower must utilise it for the purpose of or on behalf of the borrower or at
\nhis instance.\n<\/p>\n
        There is a distinction between a loan and a debt.  The meaning of debt
\nis that what is due from one person to another that is a  thing  owed  whereas
\nloan  is  that  what  is lent, i.e., what is given in the shape of money or of
\nmoney value.”\n<\/p>\n
Similarly, it was held in the judgment rendered by a Division Bench  of  Patna
\nHigh Court in AIR 1941 PATNA 233 (BHULAN PRASAD v.  RUP NARAIN) as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
        “Security bond for future contingent liability is not a loan.”\n<\/p>\n
        10.   On  the contrary, the mortgage is defined under Section 58(a) of
\nthe Transfer of Property Act, 1882 as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
“A mortgage is the transfer of an interest in specific immovable property  for
\nthe purpose of securing the payment of money<\/p>\n
advanced  or to be advanced by way of loan, an existing or future debt, or the
\nperformance of an engagement which may give rise to a pecuniary liability.\n<\/p>\n
        The transferor is called a mortgagor, the transferee a mortgagee;  the
\nprincipal  money  and  interest of which payment is secured for the time being
\nare called the mortgage-money, and  the  instrument  (if  any)  by  which  the
\ntransfer is effected is called a mortgage-deed.”\n<\/p>\n
Hence,  it  is  clear  from  the  said definition that the principal money and
\ninterest secured under the mortgage are called the mortgage money and unlike a
\nloan, the mortgage deed with reference to such transaction of lending must  be
\nregistered so as to satisfy the requirement under law.\n<\/p>\n
        11.   Similarly,  the money advanced or to be advanced by way of loan,
\nan existing or future debt, or the performance of an engagement which may give
\nrise to a pecuniary liability may form part of the consideration in respect of
\na mortgage, but, on the other hand, the loan transaction need not  necessarily
\nbe entered into by means of a registered document.\n<\/p>\n
        12.  In  QUARREL  v.  BECKFORD (1 MAD 278), while defining a mortgage,
\nit was held as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
        “Everybody knows, it consists of two things:  it is a person  contract
\nfor  a  debt secured by an estate; and in equity, the estate is no more than a
\npledge or security for the debt :- the debt is the principal;  the  Estate  is
\nthe security.    Whether  the  mortgagee  is,  or is not, in possession of the
\npledge his right is precisely the same, with this difference, indeed, that  he
\nhas  never  any  right in equity to the estate except as a fund to pay him his
\ndebt; for every other purpose the estate is the estate of the  mortgagor,  and
\nwhen  the  debt  is  paid all the mortgagee’s right and interest in the estate
\nceases.”\n<\/p>\n
        13.  Similarly, it is essential to point out that in the  illustration\n<\/p>\n
(d)  to  Section  37  of  the  Indian  Easements Act, 1982, a case is cited as
\nfollows:-\n<\/p>\n
“A mortgages Sultanpur to B, and lawfully imposes an easement on the  land  in
\nfavour of C in accordance with the provisions of Section 10.  The land is sold
\nto D  in  satisfaction  of  the  mortgage  debt.   The easement is not thereby
\nextinguished.”\n<\/p>\n
Section 37 of the said Act provides for the extinction by dissolution of right
\nto servient owner as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
        “When, from a cause which preceded the imposition of an easement,  the
\nperson  by  whom  it  was  imposed  ceases  to  have any right in the servient
\nheritage, the easement is extinguished.\n<\/p>\n
        Exception:  Nothing in this section applies to  an  easement  lawfully
\nimposed by a mortgagor in accordance with Section 10.”\n<\/p>\n
A  careful  perusal  of the dissimilarities between a loan transaction and the
\nmortgage referred supra would indicate that the transaction under  a  mortgage
\ndeed cannot at any stretch of imagination be termed as loan.\n<\/p>\n
        14.  Above all, the contention of the learned counsel for the revision
\npetitioner  is  that  under  Order  34  Rule  4  and  5,  Civil Procedure Code
\ncontemplates preliminary decree and final decree in the  suits  filed  by  the
\nplaintiff  for  recovery  of  the  mortgage money by selling the hypothica and
\ntherefore he has urged that the Legal Practitioner’s work is more  onerous  in
\nthe  case of mortgage in relation to a suit based on negotiable instrument and
\nloan.  Therefore, he has urged that the  Pleader’s  fees  should  commensurate
\nwith  the  volume  and quality of the expertise put in the respective cases by
\nthe Legal Practitioners and if that be so, the suit based on a mortgage should
\nnecessarily fall under Rule 3(2)(b) of the Legal Practitioner’s Rules, 1973.\n<\/p>\n
        15.  Having regard to the above reasons on the aspect  of  the  matter
\nunder  consideration,  this Court is of the considered opinion that the proper
\nRule to be invoked in this case should be rule 3(2)(b) of the said Rules.  The
\nopinion of this Court is further supported by the  High  Court  Original  Side
\nRules  1956  under  Order V Rule 1(2)(c), in that the fee structure is more or
\nless similar to that of the one adumbrated under Rule  3(2)(b)  of  the  Legal
\nPractitioners Fees  Rules,  1973.    For  the  above  said  reasons, the Civil
\nRevision Petition has to be allowed setting aside the impugned order.\n<\/p>\n
        16.  Thus, the Civil Revision Petition is  allowed.    However,  there
\nwill be no order as to costs.  The trial Court is directed to amend the decree
\nin the light of the observations in this order.\n<\/p>\n
Index:  Yes
\nWebsite:  Yes<\/p>\n
dpp<\/p>\n
To<\/p>\n
1.  The Subordinate Judge, Virudhunagar.\n<\/p>\n
2.  The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court M\/S.Central Bank Of India vs J. Maria Jesu Kennady on 25 March, 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 25\/03\/2004 Coram The Honourable Mr. Justice T.V. MASILAMANI C.R.P.(NPD)No.1474 of 1998 M\/s.Central Bank of India, rep. by its Branch Manager, Virudhunagar. .. Petitioner -Vs- 1. J. Maria Jesu Kennady 2. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-224207","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nM\/S.Central Bank Of India vs J. Maria Jesu Kennady on 25 March, 2004 - 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\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S.Central Bank Of India vs J. Maria Jesu Kennady on 25 March, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004\" \/>\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=\"2004-03-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-04-14T01:36:08+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\\\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S.Central Bank Of India vs J. Maria Jesu Kennady on 25 March, 2004\",\"datePublished\":\"2004-03-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-14T01:36:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004\"},\"wordCount\":1795,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S.Central Bank Of India vs J. Maria Jesu Kennady on 25 March, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2004-03-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-14T01:36:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S.Central Bank Of India vs J. Maria Jesu Kennady on 25 March, 2004\"}]},{\"@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":"M\/S.Central Bank Of India vs J. Maria Jesu Kennady on 25 March, 2004 - 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\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S.Central Bank Of India vs J. Maria Jesu Kennady on 25 March, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2004-03-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-04-14T01:36:08+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\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S.Central Bank Of India vs J. Maria Jesu Kennady on 25 March, 2004","datePublished":"2004-03-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-14T01:36:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004"},"wordCount":1795,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004","name":"M\/S.Central Bank Of India vs J. Maria Jesu Kennady on 25 March, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2004-03-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-14T01:36:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-central-bank-of-india-vs-j-maria-jesu-kennady-on-25-march-2004#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S.Central Bank Of India vs J. Maria Jesu Kennady on 25 March, 2004"}]},{"@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\/224207","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=224207"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/224207\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=224207"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=224207"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=224207"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}