{"id":234420,"date":"2009-09-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-09-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009"},"modified":"2018-10-31T02:41:14","modified_gmt":"2018-10-30T21:11:14","slug":"radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009","title":{"rendered":"Radhakrishnan vs Priya S on 22 September, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Radhakrishnan vs Priya S on 22 September, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCRP.No. 66 of 2009()\n\n\n1. RADHAKRISHNAN, S\/O. LATE DAMODHARAN,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. PRIYA S,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. DR. D. RETNAKUAR, S\n\n3. BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION\n\n4. TERRITORYMANAGER (RETAIL),\n\n5. SALES OFFICER,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.V.AJAKUMAR\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN\n\n Dated :22\/09\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                     S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.\n                - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                            C.R.P.No.66 of 2009\n                - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                      Dated: 22nd September, 2009\n\n                                    ORDER\n<\/pre>\n
      The revision is directed against the order dated 20.12.2008 in<\/p>\n
O.S.No.120 of 2002 passed by the Principal Munsiff, Trivandrum over<\/p>\n
issue No.4 raised in the suit as to whether the court is having<\/p>\n
jurisdiction to try the suit. The learned Munsiff has held, after hearing<\/p>\n
both sides, that the court has jurisdiction to try the suit, negativing<\/p>\n
the contentions raised by the defendants that in view of the<\/p>\n
agreement between the parties the suit can be filed only before the<\/p>\n
courts at Kochi and not in Trivandrum. Propriety and correctness of<\/p>\n
the finding entered on jurisdiction by the learned Munsiff is<\/p>\n
challenged in the revision by the first defendant in the suit.<\/p>\n
      2. I heard the counsel on both sides. Learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
petitioner\/1st defendant contended that as per                clause 19 of the<\/p>\n
agreement entered by the parties only the court at Kochi has got<\/p>\n
jurisdiction to entertain the suit, and so much so, the order passed by<\/p>\n
the court below on issue No.4 settled in the suit is not correct and<\/p>\n
liable to be set aside. On the other hand, learned counsel for the first<\/p>\n
respondent\/plaintiff in the suit contended that there is no merit in the<\/p>\n
challenges raised against the finding entered by the court below on<\/p>\n
CRP No.66\/09                        – 2 –<\/span><\/p>\n
issue No.4 that the court at Trivandrum has jurisdiction to try the<\/p>\n
suit.\n<\/p>\n
      3. Annexure A2 is the copy of the plaint in the suit. Suit has<\/p>\n
been filed for a declaration that the first respondent\/plaintiff is<\/p>\n
entitled to conduct the business, a retail petrol outlet, the dealership<\/p>\n
of    which    was   previously     carried   under    the    name     of<\/p>\n
M\/s.Radhakrishnan and Brothers. A decree of perpetual prohibitory<\/p>\n
injunction was also sought in the suit against defendants 3 to 5 from<\/p>\n
taking over the business of the petroleum dealership business carried<\/p>\n
in the plaint schedule premises and as against the defendants 1 and 2<\/p>\n
from causing any disturbance of the above business being run by the<\/p>\n
plaintiff in the name and style of M\/s.Radhakrishnan and Brothers.<\/p>\n
The petroleum outlet     in respect of which declaration of right to<\/p>\n
conduct that outlet was sought for by the plaintiff with prohibitory<\/p>\n
injunction against the defendants from interfering          her right to<\/p>\n
conduct     such business, was described       as the plaint schedule<\/p>\n
property. Though it was urged before me by the learned counsel for<\/p>\n
the first respondent\/plaintiff the suit has been filed with regard to the<\/p>\n
right of the plaintiff over the conducting of the petroleum outlet<\/p>\n
seeking injunction against the defendants from interfering with her<\/p>\n
CRP No.66\/09                        – 3 –<\/span><\/p>\n
enjoyment thereof and so much so, the proviso to Section 16 of the<\/p>\n
Code of Civil Procedure is applicable to such a suit in determining the<\/p>\n
jurisdiction, I am not impressed by such submissions. Similarly, the<\/p>\n
challenge to jurisdiction of the court at Trivandrum canvassed by the<\/p>\n
defendants under clause 19 of the agreement, a copy of which is<\/p>\n
produced as Annexure A1, also does not appear to have much merit<\/p>\n
in determining the question whether the court in which the suit has<\/p>\n
been instituted has territorial jurisdiction to entertain such suit.<\/p>\n
Though the reliefs have been couched in a manner as if the dispute<\/p>\n
related to the right or entitlement to run a petrol outlet and also for<\/p>\n
prohibitory injunction against the defendants interfering with such<\/p>\n
right of the plaintiff, it has to be examined with reference to the<\/p>\n
allegations raised in the plaint whether any interest in the plaint<\/p>\n
schedule immovable property having an extent of 22 cents<\/p>\n
comprising the petrol outlet is emerging for consideration and<\/p>\n
adjudication by the court. In this context, it is appropriate to take<\/p>\n
note of the allegations in paragraph 15 of the plaint which read thus:<\/p>\n
             “The plaintiff got reliable information on 7.1.2002<\/p>\n
      that the 1st and 2nd defendants are making preparations to<\/p>\n
      cause disturbances to the peaceful conduct of the BPCL<\/p>\n
CRP No.66\/09                        – 4 –<\/span><\/p>\n
       Petrol pump business being operated by the plaintiff at<\/p>\n
       Kilimanoor   in   the   plaint  schedule    premises.    The<\/p>\n
       defendants 1 and 2 may be restrained by a decree of<\/p>\n
       perpetual injunction from doing the same.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
I am not adverting to the merit of the case canvassed by the plaintiff<\/p>\n
to sustain the suit claim and the reliefs sought thereunder nor the<\/p>\n
contentions of the defendants resisting such claim. Before the court<\/p>\n
proceed to examine any of the disputed questions involved in the<\/p>\n
case, the court has satisfy that it has jurisdiction to entertain the suit.<\/p>\n
In this context, it has to be taken note that the plaintiff among the<\/p>\n
reliefs sought, has also canvassed for a decree of              perpetual<\/p>\n
prohibitory injunction against the defendants from disturbing and<\/p>\n
interfering with the conducting of the petrol outlet in the plaint<\/p>\n
schedule property.\n<\/p>\n
      4. The trial court has to examine whether the decree of<\/p>\n
injunction sought for is in respect of an immovable property and if<\/p>\n
so, the applicability of Section 16(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure in<\/p>\n
determining the territorial jurisdiction as to where the suit has to be<\/p>\n
instituted. If any interest over the immovable property is involved in<\/p>\n
a suit where a relief of injunction is claimed, needless to point out,<\/p>\n
CRP No.66\/09                       – 5 –<\/span><\/p>\n
such a suit has to be instituted within the territorial jurisdiction of the<\/p>\n
court where it is situate. A Division Bench of this court in Vas<\/p>\n
Pharmaceuticals (India) Ltd. v. State of Kerala (ILR 2006(4)<\/p>\n
Kerala 483) gives an insight as to the ambit of the right or interest in<\/p>\n
the immovable property mentioned in clause (d) of Section 16 of the<\/p>\n
Code of Civil Procedure. The learned counsel for the first<\/p>\n
respondent\/plaintiff contended that the proviso to Section 16 of the<\/p>\n
C.P.C. is applicable and so much so, since the defendants are<\/p>\n
permanently settled at Trivandrum by virtue of Section 20 of the<\/p>\n
C.P.C. the suit is entertainable in the court at Trivandrum. Even<\/p>\n
assuming that the proviso enables the entertainability of the suit to<\/p>\n
obtain relief respecting, or compensation for wrong to, immovable<\/p>\n
property by instituting such suit at the place where the defendant is<\/p>\n
residing, as covered under Section 20 of the C.P.C., it has to be<\/p>\n
pointed out that two essential conditions are to be satisfied for the<\/p>\n
applicability of the proviso. The proviso is applicable only if two<\/p>\n
conditions exist, namely, (1) that the property is held by the<\/p>\n
defendant himself or by someone on his behalf and (2) that the relief<\/p>\n
sought can be entirely obtained through his personal obedience. Here<\/p>\n
in the present case, the immovable property involved in the plaint<\/p>\n
CRP No.66\/09                        – 6 –<\/span><\/p>\n
schedule with the right to conduct the petroleum outlet situate<\/p>\n
therein is claimed by the plaintiff as of right and not held by or on<\/p>\n
behalf of the defendants. That itself is sufficient to hold that the<\/p>\n
interpretation of the proviso in the manner suggested by the counsel<\/p>\n
is inapplicable to render jurisdiction to the court where the suit has<\/p>\n
been instituted.\n<\/p>\n
      5. Setting aside the order impugned in the revision, I direct the<\/p>\n
court below to examine the matter afresh as to whether it is having<\/p>\n
territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit and pass appropriate<\/p>\n
orders taking note of the observations made above and in accordance<\/p>\n
with law, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a<\/p>\n
copy of this order.\n<\/p>\n
      Revision is disposed as above.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
srd                           S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Radhakrishnan vs Priya S on 22 September, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM CRP.No. 66 of 2009() 1. RADHAKRISHNAN, S\/O. LATE DAMODHARAN, … Petitioner Vs 1. PRIYA S, … Respondent 2. DR. D. RETNAKUAR, S 3. BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION 4. TERRITORYMANAGER (RETAIL), 5. SALES OFFICER, For Petitioner :SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH For […]<\/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-234420","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nRadhakrishnan vs Priya S on 22 September, 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\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Radhakrishnan vs Priya S on 22 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-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=\"2009-09-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-30T21:11:14+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\\\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Radhakrishnan vs Priya S on 22 September, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-30T21:11:14+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1232,\"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\\\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009\",\"name\":\"Radhakrishnan vs Priya S on 22 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-30T21:11:14+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Radhakrishnan vs Priya S on 22 September, 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":"Radhakrishnan vs Priya S on 22 September, 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\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Radhakrishnan vs Priya S on 22 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-09-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-30T21:11:14+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\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Radhakrishnan vs Priya S on 22 September, 2009","datePublished":"2009-09-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-30T21:11:14+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009"},"wordCount":1232,"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\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009","name":"Radhakrishnan vs Priya S on 22 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-09-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-30T21:11:14+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radhakrishnan-vs-priya-s-on-22-september-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Radhakrishnan vs Priya S on 22 September, 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\/234420","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=234420"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/234420\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=234420"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=234420"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=234420"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}