{"id":233770,"date":"2010-01-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-01-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010"},"modified":"2017-06-28T12:31:38","modified_gmt":"2017-06-28T07:01:38","slug":"jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010","title":{"rendered":"Jamaludeen vs Kakkamperumal Pillai on 5 January, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Jamaludeen vs Kakkamperumal Pillai on 5 January, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCRP.No. 180 of 2002(F)\n\n\n\n1. JAMALUDEEN\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. KAKKAMPERUMAL PILLAI\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.K.MEETHIAN KUNJU\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER (SR.)\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM\n\n Dated :05\/01\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n         PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ.\n                     ------------------------\n                    C.R.P.No. 180 OF 2002\n                     ------------------------\n\n            Dated this the 5 day of January, 2010\n                             th\n\n\n                           O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
Pius C.Kuriakose, J.\n<\/p>\n
     The tenant against whom the Rent Control Appellate<\/p>\n
Authority has passed     an order of eviction on the ground of<\/p>\n
arrears of rent is the revision petitioner. The parties will be<\/p>\n
referred to as the tenant and the landlord.    The landlord sought<\/p>\n
to evict the tenant only on the ground of arrears of rent.<\/p>\n
According to the landlord, the tenancy was governed by Ext.A1<\/p>\n
Rent Chit and that monthly rent is Rs.150\/-. The allegation was<\/p>\n
that  the rent at that rate was defaulted by the tenant since<\/p>\n
1990, the date of execution of Ext.A1. Denying the allegation, it<\/p>\n
was inter alia contended by the tenant that the contract rent is<\/p>\n
only Rs.50\/-.   Though the execution of Ext.A1 rent chit was<\/p>\n
admitted, the contention was that Ext.A1 was subject to a parole<\/p>\n
agreement that    the building in question will be substantially<\/p>\n
repaired and that rolling shutters will be installed in its front. It<\/p>\n
was contended      that due to non compliance of the above<\/p>\n
conditions governed by the parole agreement, Ext.A1 has not<\/p>\n
CRP.No.180\/2002                   2<\/span><\/p>\n
taken effect. The Rent Control Court enquired into the matter<\/p>\n
and at trial the evidence consisted of PW1, RW1 to RW3, Exts.A1<\/p>\n
to A3 and Exts.B1 to B11.           The Rent Control Court on<\/p>\n
appreciating the evidence came to the conclusion that Ext.A1<\/p>\n
rent chit has not been acted upon by the parties. For coming to<\/p>\n
such a conclusion, it was noticed by the Rent Control Court that<\/p>\n
the building presently under the occupation of the tenant does<\/p>\n
not satisfy the description of the building given in Ext.A1.<\/p>\n
      2. In the appeal preferred by the landlord, the Appellate<\/p>\n
Authority made a reappraisal of the entire evidence and in<\/p>\n
reversal of the findings of the Rent Control Court, the Appellate<\/p>\n
Authority   accepted the landlord’s case regarding the contract<\/p>\n
rent and also regarding the rent in arrears.\n<\/p>\n
      3. In this jurisdiction under Section 20, several grounds<\/p>\n
have been raised challenging the judgment of the Appellate<\/p>\n
Authority and Sri.Varghese Prem learned counsel for the revision<\/p>\n
petitioner has addressed us very strenuously on all the above<\/p>\n
grounds.      All the submissions of      Sri.Varghese Prem were<\/p>\n
resisted by Sri. S.V.Balakrishna Iyer, learned senior counsel for<\/p>\n
the respondent\/landlord.\n<\/p>\n
CRP.No.180\/2002                   3<\/span><\/p>\n
      4. Sri.Varghese Prem drew our attention to Ext.A1 and<\/p>\n
submitted that going by Ext.A1 the building has an area of 106<\/p>\n
sq.feet while the evidence on record in the case will show that<\/p>\n
the building under the actual enjoyment of the tenant is below<\/p>\n
40 sq.feet only. The building, the learned counsel pointed out, is<\/p>\n
only a stair case room.     Since rent of Rs.150\/-  was agreed to<\/p>\n
be paid by the tenant only for a building which satisfies the<\/p>\n
description of the building given in Ext.A1, the landlord is not<\/p>\n
justified in insisting that the tenant must pay the above rent for<\/p>\n
the present building which has nothing to do with the building<\/p>\n
described in Ext.A1. The learned counsel also highlighted before<\/p>\n
us Ext.B10 lawyer notice sent by the landlord in the year 1997<\/p>\n
and    submitted that there is not even a      whisper in Ext.B10<\/p>\n
regarding the rent in arrears.\n<\/p>\n
      5.    Sri.S.V.Balakrishna Iyer would     remind us of the<\/p>\n
contours of the jurisdiction in which we are presently sitting.<\/p>\n
According to the      learned senior counsel, under the statutory<\/p>\n
scheme the final fact finding authority is the Appellate Authority<\/p>\n
and when the findings of that Authority are reasonable, there is<\/p>\n
no warrant at all for interference in revision.<\/p>\n
CRP.No.180\/2002                   4<\/span><\/p>\n
      6. We have considered the rival submissions addressed at<\/p>\n
the Bar   in the light of those items of evidence to which our<\/p>\n
attention was drawn by the learned counsel. As rightly submitted<\/p>\n
by the learned senior counsel for the respondent, under the<\/p>\n
statutory scheme the Appellate Authority is the final authority on<\/p>\n
facts. Here execution of Ext.A1 is not disputed. The tenant set<\/p>\n
up a parole agreement under which the landlord agreed to repair<\/p>\n
the building and to install rolling shutters around an area of 106<\/p>\n
square feet and the tenant agreed to pay          the rent at the<\/p>\n
enhanced rate of Rs.150\/- per month for such a          renovated<\/p>\n
building.  The learned Appellate Authority has rightly referred to<\/p>\n
Section 92 of the Evidence Act and correctly held that when a<\/p>\n
parole agreement is set up, the burden will be heavy on the part<\/p>\n
of the person who sets up such agreement to plead and prove<\/p>\n
such agreement.      The pleadings do not contain sufficient<\/p>\n
foundation for the parole agreement which is said to have been<\/p>\n
entered into. As for the nature of proof given, we notice that it<\/p>\n
is only the oral evidence of AW2 and AW3.        We find from the<\/p>\n
judgment of the Appellate Authority that the Appellate Authority<\/p>\n
has analysed the evidenced of        AW2 and AW3 throughly and<\/p>\n
CRP.No.180\/2002                   5<\/span><\/p>\n
given cogent reasons for discarding their evidence.        It would<\/p>\n
appear as if the circumstance that no allegation was levelled by<\/p>\n
the landlord in Ext.B10 lawyer notice regarding the arrears of<\/p>\n
rent at a time when going by the allegation of the landlord the<\/p>\n
rent was in arrears has some moment.          But the reason stated<\/p>\n
by the Appellate Authority for not attaching much importance to<\/p>\n
that circumstance is that in Ext.B10         the demand was for<\/p>\n
enhancement of rent and it was not necessary to mention about<\/p>\n
the arrears of rent, if any due at the time.   The above reason is<\/p>\n
plausible one.\n<\/p>\n
     7. Having scanned the judgment of the Appellate Authority,<\/p>\n
we are of the view that though the findings are in reversal of the<\/p>\n
decision of the Rent Control Court, all those findings are based on<\/p>\n
appreciation of the evidence which we feel has been proper.<\/p>\n
Almost every argument that was raised on behalf of the tenant<\/p>\n
has been considered by the Appellate Authority and rejected<\/p>\n
giving sound reasons.    In this jurisdiction under Section 20, this<\/p>\n
court is not expected ordinarily to substitute our conclusions for<\/p>\n
conclusions of fact arrived     at by the fact finding authority<\/p>\n
especially when they are reasonable.      We feel, having regard to<\/p>\n
CRP.No.180\/2002                   6<\/span><\/p>\n
the contours of our jurisdiction under Section 20, that there is no<\/p>\n
irregularity, illegality or impropriety about the findings entered<\/p>\n
by the statutory Appellate Authority. We also notice that it is<\/p>\n
only a tentative order of eviction under Section 11 (2) (b) which<\/p>\n
has been passed against the revision petitioner\/tenant.         It is<\/p>\n
always open to the revision petitioner to make requisite deposit<\/p>\n
under Section 11 (2)(c).        We also      take into account the<\/p>\n
circumstance that the building in question is situated in an<\/p>\n
important area of the North Paravoor Municipal town and we<\/p>\n
have no doubt in our mind        that if fair rent of the building is<\/p>\n
fixed presently the same will not be less than the contract rent as<\/p>\n
alleged by the landlord.\n<\/p>\n
     The upshot of the above discussion is that the revision fails<\/p>\n
and we dismiss the same.         We grant two months time from<\/p>\n
today to the revision petitioner to have the order got vacated by<\/p>\n
making requisite deposits under Section 11 (2)(c) of the Act.<\/p>\n
                                    PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE<\/p>\n
                                    C.K.ABDUL REHIM , JUDGE
\ndpk<\/p>\n
CRP.No.180\/2002    7<\/span><\/p>\n
                     PIUS C.KURIAKOSE &
\n                     C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ.\n<\/p>\n
                     ————————\n<\/p>\n
                     C.R.P.No. 180 OF 2002\n<\/p>\n
                     ————————\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                          O R D E R<\/p>\n
                          5th January,2010<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Jamaludeen vs Kakkamperumal Pillai on 5 January, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM CRP.No. 180 of 2002(F) 1. JAMALUDEEN … Petitioner Vs 1. KAKKAMPERUMAL PILLAI … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.P.K.MEETHIAN KUNJU For Respondent :SRI.S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER (SR.) The Hon’ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE The Hon’ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM Dated […]<\/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-233770","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nJamaludeen vs Kakkamperumal Pillai on 5 January, 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\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Jamaludeen vs Kakkamperumal Pillai on 5 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-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=\"2010-01-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-06-28T07:01:38+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\\\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Jamaludeen vs Kakkamperumal Pillai on 5 January, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-28T07:01:38+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1237,\"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\\\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010\",\"name\":\"Jamaludeen vs Kakkamperumal Pillai on 5 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-28T07:01:38+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jamaludeen vs Kakkamperumal Pillai on 5 January, 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":"Jamaludeen vs Kakkamperumal Pillai on 5 January, 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\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Jamaludeen vs Kakkamperumal Pillai on 5 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-01-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-06-28T07:01:38+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\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Jamaludeen vs Kakkamperumal Pillai on 5 January, 2010","datePublished":"2010-01-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-28T07:01:38+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010"},"wordCount":1237,"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\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010","name":"Jamaludeen vs Kakkamperumal Pillai on 5 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-01-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-28T07:01:38+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jamaludeen-vs-kakkamperumal-pillai-on-5-january-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jamaludeen vs Kakkamperumal Pillai on 5 January, 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\/233770","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=233770"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/233770\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=233770"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=233770"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=233770"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}