{"id":236611,"date":"2010-07-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-07-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010"},"modified":"2016-08-06T15:02:05","modified_gmt":"2016-08-06T09:32:05","slug":"elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010","title":{"rendered":"Elachair vs Wilson on 14 July, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Elachair vs Wilson on 14 July, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCRP.No. 2047 of 1994(H)\n\n\n\n1. ELACHAIR\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. WILSON\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER (SR.)\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN\n\n Dated :14\/07\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                                                       \"C.R.\"\n           THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN\n                                 &\n               S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ.\n                   -------------------------------\n                 C.R.P.NO.2047 OF 1994 ()\n                 -----------------------------------\n            Dated this the 14th day of July, 2010\n\n                           O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
     This matter comes up before us by a reference made by the<\/p>\n
learned Single Judge by stating that the case involves important<\/p>\n
questions of law, and, therefore, the matter requires to be<\/p>\n
considered by a larger bench.        We, therefore, bestowed our<\/p>\n
anxious consideration to the entire facts and pleadings, material<\/p>\n
evidence, order of the Land Tribunal and the judgment of the<\/p>\n
Appellate Authority, notwithstanding that no specific question of<\/p>\n
law has been pointedly suggested in the reference order, for<\/p>\n
consideration.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
     2. This revision is under Section 103 of the Kerala Land<\/p>\n
Reforms Act, 1963, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’. The 1st<\/p>\n
respondent herein, whom we would hereinafter call the<\/p>\n
C.R.P.2047\/94                    2<\/span><\/p>\n
‘applicant’, filed an application before the Land Tribunal, under<\/p>\n
Section 80B of the Act, for purchase of kudikidappu right. He<\/p>\n
put his claim based on Explanation IIA of Section 2(25) of the<\/p>\n
Act. His case was that he was in occupation of the land and the<\/p>\n
dwelling house therein, from 16.8.1968 to 1.1.1970 and even<\/p>\n
thereafter, that being the statutory requirement to claim benefit<\/p>\n
of Explanation IIA of Section 2(25) of the Act, which is a code by<\/p>\n
itself and operates notwithstanding any judgment, decree or<\/p>\n
order of any court.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      3. For the purpose of the case in hand, we do not deem it<\/p>\n
necessary to examine as to whether the different conditions as to<\/p>\n
the nature of the building, costs of its construction etc. have<\/p>\n
been satisfied in terms of the provisions in Explanation IIA and<\/p>\n
the provisos thereunder. The short issue to be considered is as<\/p>\n
to whether the applicant could be treated as a person “in<\/p>\n
occupation” of the land and dwelling house during the relevant<\/p>\n
time, that is, from 16.8.1968 to 1.1.1970.\n<\/p>\n
C.R.P.2047\/94                    3<\/span><\/p>\n
      4.   The undisputed facts are that the land originally<\/p>\n
belonged to Kunhi, who filed O.S.No.620\/1104 ME for eviction of<\/p>\n
four persons including Mathai Kathanar and his wife Kunhitti.<\/p>\n
Mathai Kathanar defended that case contending that he had put<\/p>\n
up a building and is residing there.      That suit was decreed<\/p>\n
ordering    eviction,  also   by   paying   Kathanar    value of<\/p>\n
improvements. The sequence of events thereafter in relation to<\/p>\n
that suit is irrelevant for the purpose of the issue in hand. All<\/p>\n
that deserve to be noticed is that Mathai Kathanar and his wife<\/p>\n
Kunhitti had three children – Mathew, Mariamma and Elachiar.<\/p>\n
Kunhitti, thereafter, sued her son Mathew by filing O.S.No.315<\/p>\n
of 1964 seeking his eviction from the building. Mathew set up a<\/p>\n
case that he has a lease agreement with his mother Kunhitti.<\/p>\n
That found its waterloo and O.S.No.315 of 1964 was decreed<\/p>\n
holding that Mathew was only a trespasser and that he is liable<\/p>\n
to be evicted. That decree is stated to be pending execution.<\/p>\n
      5. The applicant Wilson is one among the five children of<\/p>\n
the aforesaid Mathew and his wife Thankamma. Wilson, who,<\/p>\n
C.R.P.2047\/94                   4<\/span><\/p>\n
going by the materials on record, was born in 1958, filed the<\/p>\n
original application before the Land Tribunal claiming that he<\/p>\n
was in occupation of the building in question which is the very<\/p>\n
same building involved in O.S.No.315 of 1964. We may, at once,<\/p>\n
notice that in 1968, he would have been hardly ten years old.<\/p>\n
The relevant period for the purpose of Explanation IIA of Section<\/p>\n
2(25) of the Act is 16.8.1968 to 1.1.1970.       The question is<\/p>\n
whether he who resided in the building along with his siblings<\/p>\n
and their father Mathew, who faced the decree for eviction,<\/p>\n
could claim occupation of the building to set up a right referable<\/p>\n
to Explanation IIA of Section 2(25) of the Act.<\/p>\n
      6.   In this context, the learned senior counsel for the<\/p>\n
applicant (1st respondent herein) argued that the operation of<\/p>\n
Explanation IIA is notwithstanding any judgment or decree, and<\/p>\n
therefore, the findings in O.S.No.315 of 1964 would have no<\/p>\n
bearing on the claim set up by the applicant. What is provided<\/p>\n
by the non obstante clause to Explanation IIA to Section 2(25) of<\/p>\n
the Act is that the kudikidappu right referable to that provision<\/p>\n
C.R.P.2047\/94                    5<\/span><\/p>\n
on the basis of any occupation and the jurisprudential content of<\/p>\n
that right would not get diluted in any manner by any judgment,<\/p>\n
decree or order issued earlier. That does not mean that the<\/p>\n
courts are disentitled or precluded from looking into earlier<\/p>\n
judgments which decided other issues of facts if could be treated<\/p>\n
as conclusive on material aspects and particulars which would<\/p>\n
have an impact on the ultimate question for decision under<\/p>\n
Explanation IIA of Section 2(25) of the Act.        The decree in<\/p>\n
O.S.No.315 of 1964 and the judgment thereof categorically<\/p>\n
negatived the plea of Mathew that he was a lessee under his<\/p>\n
mother Kunhitti. It was found that he is a trespasser liable to be<\/p>\n
evicted through the process of law. Possession is a necessary<\/p>\n
element to treat a person as a trespasser. Obviously, the clear<\/p>\n
finding in O.S.No.315 of 1964 was that Mathew was in<\/p>\n
possession. If that be so, the said finding against Mathew cannot<\/p>\n
be ignored while his son Wilson claims that he was in occupation<\/p>\n
of the very same building when he was 10 to 12 years old and on<\/p>\n
the basis of that occupation, he is entitled to an independent<\/p>\n
right referable to Explanation IIA to Section 2(25) of the Act. We<\/p>\n
C.R.P.2047\/94                   6<\/span><\/p>\n
find pearls of wisdom in this regard in the judgment of this Court<\/p>\n
in Mariam and Others v. Ouseph Xavier (1971 KLT 709),<\/p>\n
wherein, Justice V.R.Krishna Iyer succinctly states that “the law<\/p>\n
would reduce itself to an absurdity if every man, woman and<\/p>\n
child in a hut begins to set up an independent kudikidappu right<\/p>\n
merely because the master of the household has taken<\/p>\n
permission to occupy and the others are inhabiting the house<\/p>\n
along with him.” We are aware that permission for the purpose<\/p>\n
of occupation is not an element which is relevant for deciding a<\/p>\n
claim under Explanation IIA.     Therefore, we treat it that the<\/p>\n
claim of the applicant has to be decided notwithstanding<\/p>\n
whether his father had taken any permission from any person to<\/p>\n
occupy building or land. That position notwithstanding, it has<\/p>\n
necessarily to be laid down that the principle enunciated as<\/p>\n
above, by Justice Krishna Iyer applies on all fours even to cases<\/p>\n
where the kudikidappu right that is sought to be established is<\/p>\n
independent of any permissive occupation.       So much so, the<\/p>\n
judgment in O.S.No.315 of 1964 nails down the claim of the<\/p>\n
applicant on the face of the findings therein that Mathew is a<\/p>\n
C.R.P.2047\/94                   7<\/span><\/p>\n
trespasser.   Kunhitti, whose other heirs, namely, the sisters of<\/p>\n
Mathew and their estate are the respondents in the proceedings<\/p>\n
initiated by the applicant Wilson.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      7. For the aforesaid reasons, we find that the occupation<\/p>\n
claimed by the applicant Wilson has no relevance for the purpose<\/p>\n
of Explanation IIA of Section 2(25) of the Act. We are also of the<\/p>\n
view that the applicant Wilson, at the age of 10 or 12, apart from<\/p>\n
the fact that he was a minor, could not have, by reason of his<\/p>\n
tender age, set up an occupation which could be taken<\/p>\n
cognizance of by law independent of the lease claimed by his<\/p>\n
father and the possession of his father as found by the civil court<\/p>\n
in O.S.No.315 of 1964.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      8. The Appellate Authority, in our view, did not exercise its<\/p>\n
authority under Section 102 of the Act in deciding the appeal.<\/p>\n
The final order passed in the appeal by the Appellate Authority<\/p>\n
and the decision of the Land Tribunal, which has merged therein,<\/p>\n
are erroneous in law and are liable to be set aside in exercise of<\/p>\n
C.R.P.2047\/94                     8<\/span><\/p>\n
the powers under Section 103 of the Act. Hence, this revision<\/p>\n
succeeds.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      In the result, this revision is allowed setting aside the<\/p>\n
impugned judgment of the Appellate Authority and the order of<\/p>\n
the Land Tribunal. Resultantly, O.A.No.87 of 1978 on the file of<\/p>\n
the Land Tribunal, Chavakkad, is dismissed.        The revision<\/p>\n
petitioner is entitled to costs through out.<\/p>\n
                           THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN
\n                                            JUDGE<\/p>\n
                                  S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
\n                                            JUDGE<\/p>\n
prp<\/p>\n
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN
\n                                        &
\n    S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            ——————————-\n<\/p>\n
\n        C.R.P.NO.2047 OF 1994 ()<\/p>\n
        ———————————–\n<\/p>\n
                             O R D E R<\/p>\n
              14th day of July, 2010<\/p>\n
C.R.P.2047\/94    10<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Elachair vs Wilson on 14 July, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM CRP.No. 2047 of 1994(H) 1. ELACHAIR … Petitioner Vs 1. WILSON … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF For Respondent :SRI.S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER (SR.) The Hon’ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN The Hon’ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN Dated :14\/07\/2010 O R […]<\/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-236611","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nElachair vs Wilson on 14 July, 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\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Elachair vs Wilson on 14 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-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=\"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-08-06T09:32:05+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\\\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Elachair vs Wilson on 14 July, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-06T09:32:05+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1369,\"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\\\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010\",\"name\":\"Elachair vs Wilson on 14 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-06T09:32:05+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Elachair vs Wilson on 14 July, 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":"Elachair vs Wilson on 14 July, 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\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Elachair vs Wilson on 14 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-08-06T09:32:05+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\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Elachair vs Wilson on 14 July, 2010","datePublished":"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-06T09:32:05+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010"},"wordCount":1369,"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\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010","name":"Elachair vs Wilson on 14 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-06T09:32:05+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/elachair-vs-wilson-on-14-july-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Elachair vs Wilson on 14 July, 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\/236611","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=236611"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/236611\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=236611"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=236611"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=236611"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}