{"id":240563,"date":"2002-02-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-02-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002"},"modified":"2016-10-19T19:55:48","modified_gmt":"2016-10-19T14:25:48","slug":"v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002","title":{"rendered":"V.R. Rajakumaran vs B. Jayalakshmi on 12 February, 2002"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
V.R. Rajakumaran vs B. Jayalakshmi on 12 February, 2002<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS          \n\n Dated: 12.02.2002\n\nCoram : \n\n THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. SHANMUGAM            \n\nand \n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. THANGAVEL           \n\n\n C.M.A. No.1006 of 1999 \n\n\n\n V.R. Rajakumaran                               ..  Appellant\n\n                vs.\n\n B. Jayalakshmi                                 ..  Respondent        \n\n\n\nPRAYER : Appeal against the order of the Family Court, Madurai dated 19.8.1998 and made in H.M.O.P. No.184 of 1994.  \n\n\n:                                    ORDER \n<\/pre>\n
        This Appeal coming on for hearing on this day and  upon  perusing  the
\nMemorandum  of Appeal, the order of the Lower Court and the material papers in
\nthe case, and upon hearing the arguments of  Mr.    S.    Muthuraman  for  the
\nappellant and of  Mr.    A.T.  Balaji for the respondent, the Court passed the
\nfollowing Judgment :\n<\/p>\n
                                J U D G M E N T <\/p>\n
           (Judgment of the Court was delivered by P. Shanmugam, J.)<\/p>\n
        The unsuccessful petitioner before the  Family  Court  for  a  divorce
\nunder  Section  13(1)(i)(a)  of the Hindu Marriage Act is the appellant before
\nthis court.  The appellant had prayed for a decree of divorce  mainly  on  the
\nground  of  desertion  and  other  allegations  set  out in the petition dated
\n4.3.1993.  The respondent filed a counter  statement  on  6.8.1993  and  after
\nconsidering  the  oral  and  documentary  evidence,  the  Family  Court  Judge
\ndismissed the petition.  The present appeal is against this judgment.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
2.  Both the parties are educated, the husband being a qualified Engineer  and
\nthe wife  working  as an Agricultural Officer in a Government Department.  The
\nmarriage took place on 21.6.1991 as per the customs and religious  formalities
\nof their community.    A female child was born to them on 21.6.1992.  Within a
\nshort  period,  a  lawyer’s  notice  was  issued  dated   14.1.1993   by   the
\nappellant\/husband setting  out  the  grounds for divorce.  The respondent\/wife
\nimmediately wrote a letter dated 4.1.1993 to the  counsel  for  the  appellant
\nrequesting him  to  permit them to live together.  Thereafter, she also gave a
\nreply through her counsel on 5.3.1993.  The learned Family Court Judge,  after
\nconsidering both the oral and documentary evidence, dismissed the application.\n<\/p>\n
        3.  We have heard the counsel for the appellant  and  the  respondent,
\ngone through the records and considered the matter carefully.\n<\/p>\n
        4.   The  main  grounds  urged in support of the petition are that the
\nrespondent\/wife compelled the appellant\/husband to resign his lucrative job as
\nan Engineer at Jamshedpur and made him to come back to Madurai.    Thereafter,
\nthe  respondent  was not willing to resign her job as Agricultural Officer and
\ncontinued to go to office, insisting for  a  separate  residence.    When  the
\nappellant  refused  to comply with her request, she started giving troubles by
\nnot fulfilling her matrimonial obligations which a wife  is  expected  to  do,
\nthereby causing  mental  agony  and  cruelty to the appellant.  Even after the
\ntransfer of the petitioner to Madurai, she did not  change  her  attitude  and
\ninsisted  for  a  separate residence at Pasumalai where her office is located.
\nThe respondent ill-treated the appellant’s parents and his close relatives and
\nhad not given due respect to them.  According to the appellant,  she  used  to
\ntease him  on  his  unemployment  in  front of his friends and relatives.  The
\nrespondent  used  to  leave  her  marital  home  to  her  parents’  house   at
\nAruppukottai without  informing  the  appellant.  She had often threatened the
\nappellant that she is going to  commit  suicide  and  was  also  making  false
\nallegations  against the appellant’s parents that there was a demand of dowry.
\nOn 1.2.1992, the respondent left the house taking all her jewels and belonging
\nalong with her and did not turn up to his house thereafter.    The  respondent
\ngave  birth to a female child on 21.6.1992, but the birth of the child was not
\ninformed to the appellant.  Even after the appellant’s attempt to go  and  see
\nthe child, the respondent did not change her attitude.  In view of the adamant
\nattitude of the respondent in refusing to come and live with the appellant and
\nher  insistence  to  have  a separate house, finding no other alternative, the
\nappellant filed the petition seeking divorce on the ground that the respondent
\nhad deserted him and alleging mental cruelty.\n<\/p>\n
        5.  All  these  allegations  are  denied  by the respondent\/wife.  She
\npictures an entirely different story than what had been stated in the petition
\nof the appellant.  Her main stand is that the husband has hatched out  a  case
\nfor  divorce  on the ground of desertion by making necessary ingredients so as
\nto get a decree for divorce with an ulterior purpose.  She had made  it  clear
\nthat  she  is always ready and willing to live with her husband and denied all
\nthe allegations contained in the petition.  According to  her,  the  appellant
\nhad resigned  his  job  on his own and not on her compulsion.  Secondly, it is
\nher specific case that she never agreed  to  resign  her  own  job.    On  the
\ncontrary,  it  is  the respondent’s father who helped her to get a transfer to
\nMadurai.  She further says that she was always affectionate to the parents and
\nrelatives of the appellant and had not  compelled  the  appellant  to  have  a
\nseparate residence  as  claimed by him.  She was taking care of the family and
\nthe appellant’s parents.  After the birth of the female child, the parents  of
\nthe appellant were disappointed to know that it was a girl child and hence, it
\nis  only  with  an ulterior motive, an allegation that she did not return from
\nher parents’ house is made.  All the  allegations  regarding  her  attempt  to
\ncommit  suicide  are,  according to the respondent, created for the purpose of
\nthe case.  On 2.2.1992, she was five months’ pregnant.  Even  prior  to  that,
\nshe was having complaints of giddiness and on one such occasion, she fell down
\nin the kitchen.  Her father-in-law as well as the mother-in-law, who were with
\nher,  made  arrangements  to take her to the hospital where she was advised to
\ntake rest.  Only at their insistence she was taken to her parents’ house.  She
\nnever took back the jewels along with her while leaving for her parents’ house
\nexcept for the usual jewellery which she was wearing.  After the birth of  the
\nchild, there  was  no  quarrel  between  them.  The appellant came and saw the
\nchild and he had also brought new clothes for the child and  was  staying  for
\ntwo days  at  Aruppukottai.    He  had given telegram to his parents about the
\nbirth of the child.  However, they were disappointed to know  that  the  child
\nwas a female child and not a male child.\n<\/p>\n
        6.   Thus,  we  find  that  each and every allegation contained in the
\npetition has been denied in detail by the respondent\/wife and an entirely  new
\ncase has  been  put  forward  by her.  The appellant has also filed a detailed
\nreply affidavit.  From the findings of the court below, we find that according
\nto the court below, the main grounds on  which  the  appellant  sought  for  a
\nseparation  are  that  the respondent refused to resign her job even though it
\nwas agreed to be done prior to the marriage; secondly,  the  wife  forced  the
\nappellant  to resign his job; thirdly, she wanted to have a separate residence
\nof her own, away from the appellant’s family; fourthly, it is alleged that she
\nhad been threatening to commit suicide on the ground that she is  not  allowed
\nto have  a  separate residence.  It is also stated that she is not showing due
\nrespect to the appellant’s parents.  The Family Court found that the  wife  is
\nalways  willing  to  go  and  live  with  her  husband and if he wants, she is
\nprepared to resign her job.  But, it is found that it is the appellant who  is
\nnot willing  to  take  her  back.    It  is  found  that the appellant had not
\nestablished cruelty.  The  Family  Court  observed,  “The  petty  trifles  and
\nquarrels in an ordinary family should not be taken as a ground for cruelty and
\ndivorce.   The  day-to-day wear and tear of life has been exaggerated to claim
\ndivorce”.  The application was dismissed with costs.\n<\/p>\n
        7.  The main point for consideration is whether the appellant has made
\nout a case for divorce.  The main plea of the appellant in support of his case
\nare :\n<\/p>\n
        (i)   Compulsion on the part of his wife to resign his
\nlucrative job;\n<\/p>\n
        (ii)  Refusal of the wife to resign her job;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
        (iii) Failure to perform her marital obligations;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
        (iv)  Threatening with suicide;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
        (v)   Disrespect to elders; and\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
        (vi)  Failure to inform the birth of the child.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
We  find from the records that the statement that the husband was compelled by
\nthe respondent to resign his job cannot be accepted.  After the marriage  took
\nplace  on  21.6.1991,  both of them left for Jamshedpur and lived there hardly
\nfor a month’s time and within that one month period, it is very  difficult  to
\naccept the case of the appellant that the wife had compelled him to resign his
\njob.   In  his  own legal notice, the appellant has stated that the respondent
\nwas putting obstacle for improving in his life by requesting for  resignation.
\nBut,  from  Ex.R.1,  in his alleged interview given to a magazine dealing with
\nindustries, along with his photograph, he has  stated  that  he  has  taken  a
\ndecision to  start  his  own  hosiery  industry  after  resigning his job.  He
\nfurther says that only due to his extreme interest in selfemployment,  he  had
\nresigned his  job wherein he was drawing a salary of Rs.7,000\/-.  At more than
\none place, he has mentioned about his selfemployment and his ambition to  earn
\ncrores of rupees in future years.  This is in consonance with the stand of the
\nrespondent  that even before the marriage, the appellant had decided to resign
\nhis job and come back to start his own industry.  Therefore, it is too much to
\nask the court to believe that within one  month  of  the  marriage,  the  wife
\ncompelled  the  appellant  to  resign his job, come back to Madurai and remain
\nunemployed, on the basis of the self-serving oral testimony.   No  wife  would
\nlike  her  husband  to remain unemployed, especially when both the parents are
\nvery much interested in having employment.  Therefore, the allegation  has  no
\nsubstance.\n<\/p>\n
        8.  The second allegation  as  found  in  the  petition  is  that  the
\nrespondent  refused  to  resign  her  job after having assured the appellant’s
\nfamily that she would resign the job after marriage.  The said allegation also
\ncannot be accepted to be true.  In Ex.A.5, the  legal  notice  issued  by  the
\nappellant, in paragraph 4, he has stated that only with the assistance and the
\nefforts  of  the  appellant’s father, the respondent could get a transfer from
\nParamakudi to Madurai.  This shows that the appellant’s family  was  assisting
\nher to  get  a  transfer.   Therefore, if really they wanted the respondent to
\nresign from the job, they would have not helped her to get the transfer.   The
\nappellant’s father was an officer in the Agricultural Department and according
\nto  them,  it  is  not in dispute that many of their relatives are employed in
\nGovernment service and the specific case of the respondent is that they wanted
\nan employed daughter-in-law who is in Government service and therefore,  after
\nhaving known that the respondent is employed in Government service, it is very
\ndifficult  to  be  lieve  that  they  would  have compelled her to resign as a
\ncondition for the marriage.  The case of the appellant, as  stated,  that  she
\nhad  agreed  to resign the job after the marriage and thereafter refused to do
\nso is therefore difficult to accept.  Further, there is no purpose  to  resign
\nher job  when  actually the husband is also unemployed.  She had categorically<\/p>\n
stated that she  is  prepared  to  resign  her  job  if  he  takes  her  back.
\nTherefore,  on  this  count  also,  we  are  unable  to accept the case of the
\nappellant.\n<\/p>\n
        9.  Thirdly, it is stated  that  the  wife  is  insisting  to  have  a
\nseparate family  and is asking the appellant to come away from his family.  As
\nagainst the legal notice stating that she is trying to have a separate  house,
\nshe had, on her own, written a letter to the counsel for the appellant wherein
\nshe  says  that  she  was  shocked to receive the legal notice and that she is
\nprepared to live with her  loving  husband  and  respected  father-in-law  and
\nmother-in-law.  She further says that she wanted to live with them jointly and
\nrequested the counsel to help her in her endeavour.  This letter, in our view,
\nappears to  be very natural, coming out of the inner feelings of the wife.  We
\nhave no reason  to  reject  this  letter  written  by  the  respondent,  since
\nadmittedly there  is  no reply to this letter.  Thereafter, the respondent has
\ngiven a detailed reply, countering each and every claim  of  the  appellant  0
\nthat it  is  the  wife who wanted to go for a separate house.  In the light of
\nthe specific stand and the facts and circumstaces of  the  case,  we  find  no
\ngrounds  to accept the case of the appellant that the wife was insisting for a
\nseparate house of her own and that this is one of the grounds for cruelty.\n<\/p>\n
        10.  The marriage was held in January, 1991 and she was  five  months’
\npregnant in  February  1992.    She  became  sick because of her pregnancy and
\nadmittedly she was taken to the hospital and was advised  rest  and  was  then
\ntaken to  her  parents’  house  on  her medical leave.  After the birth of the
\nchild in January 1992, she was refused permission to come  back.    Therefore,
\nthere is no question of her denial of marital obligations towards her husband.\n<\/p>\n
        11.   It is submitted that the appellant was showing disrespect to the
\nparents of the appellants and his relatives and that she had tried to threaten
\nto commit suicide.  In support of this plea, the  appellant  has  let  in  the
\nevidence of P.Ws.   2, 3 and 4.  Admittedly, the witnesses are all either very
\nclose relatives or friends of the appellant’ s family.  Even P.W.2 had  stated
\nthat  when  the respondent was questioned about this in the panchayat, she did
\nnot reply anything but only stated that she will live  peacefully  thereafter.
\nP.W.3 is  a  very  close  relative  of  the appellant.  P.W.4 is said to be an
\nindependent witness, who is living in the house opposite  to  the  appellant’s
\nhouse.   As per this deposition, on one particular day, the appellant’s mother
\ncame to his house  and  informed  him  that  her  daughter-in-law  has  poured
\nkerosene upon  herself and she requested for assistance.  They took her to the
\ndoctor and got her examined.  According to the doctor, it was a  suicide  case
\nand he  requested them to take her to the Government Hospital.  The respondent
\ninformed that she has only threatened and that she  has  not  poured  kerosene
\nwhen she  was  asked  as  to  why she did so, being an educated lady.  In this
\ncase, the doctor was not examined.  Further, the case,  as  stated  by  P.W.4,
\nappears to  be  not  clear.   If really the doctor was examined, it would have
\nbeen easily found out whether there was actually an attempt to commit  suicide
\neither  by  consuming  or  pouring  kerosene  and  he would not have asked the
\npatient to be taken to the hospital unless it was true.  Admittedly,  she  was
\nnot taken to  the  hospital.    There  is  inconsistency  in the version.  The
\nstatement of P.W.4 in the cross-examination is not helpful to  the  appellant.
\nAs  a  matter of fact, he says that he does not know whether there will be any
\nquarrel between the appellant and the respondent and that he does not know why
\nthey are living separately.  From this, it is  clear  that  a  person  who  is
\nliving  in  the  house  opposite  to  the  appellant’s house in unaware of any
\nproblem in the family of the appellant.  If the  case  as  spoken  to  by  the
\nappellant  is  true, definitely he would have known about it and he would have
\ndeposed about the factum of atleast some of the allegations as stated  in  the
\npetition.   The respondent, apart from denying the allegation, says that there
\nwas no such incident and that she does not  P.W.4.    The  burden  is  on  the
\nappellant to  prove  his  case.    In  our  view,  the appellant had failed to
\nestablish this allegation.  On the  contrary,  the  finding  is,  “It  is  the
\npetitioner who  has  deserted  the  respondent”.  The appellant and his family
\nwere upset over the birth of  the  female  child  and  she  had  categorically
\nreplied to  the notice that she wants to live with her husband and family.  We<\/p>\n
are unable to attach any credence to the case of the appellant.  In the  light
\nof  the  discussion  as stated above, we are of the view that no case has been
\nmade out as alleged.\n<\/p>\n
        11.  We find that the learned Family Court Judge has gone through  the
\nevidence  and  has,  in our view, rightly found that no grounds have been made
\nout to grant the relief sought for in the petition  filed  by  the  appellant.
\nHence,  we do not find any ground to interfere with the judgment of the Family
\nCourt.  The appeal is devoid of any merit and it is accordingly dismissed.  No
\ncosts.\n<\/p>\n
(P.S.M.J.)  (P.T.J.)
\n 12.02.2002.\n<\/p>\n
ab<\/p>\n
Sd\/..\n<\/p>\n
Assistant Registrar<\/p>\n
\/\/ TRUE COPY \/\/  <\/p>\n
Sub Assistant Registrar (C.S.)<\/p>\n
To
\nThe Judge,
\nFamily Court,
\nMadurai.\n<\/p>\n
P. SHANMUGAM, J.\n<\/p>\n
and
\nP. THANGAVEL, J.\n<\/p>\n
C.M.A. No.1006 of 1999 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court V.R. Rajakumaran vs B. Jayalakshmi on 12 February, 2002 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 12.02.2002 Coram : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. SHANMUGAM and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. THANGAVEL C.M.A. No.1006 of 1999 V.R. Rajakumaran .. Appellant vs. B. Jayalakshmi .. Respondent PRAYER : Appeal against the […]<\/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-240563","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nV.R. Rajakumaran vs B. Jayalakshmi on 12 February, 2002 - 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\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"V.R. Rajakumaran vs B. Jayalakshmi on 12 February, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002\" \/>\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=\"2002-02-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-10-19T14:25:48+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=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"V.R. Rajakumaran vs B. Jayalakshmi on 12 February, 2002\",\"datePublished\":\"2002-02-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-19T14:25:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002\"},\"wordCount\":2852,\"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\\\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002\",\"name\":\"V.R. Rajakumaran vs B. Jayalakshmi on 12 February, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2002-02-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-19T14:25:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"V.R. Rajakumaran vs B. Jayalakshmi on 12 February, 2002\"}]},{\"@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":"V.R. Rajakumaran vs B. Jayalakshmi on 12 February, 2002 - 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\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"V.R. Rajakumaran vs B. Jayalakshmi on 12 February, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2002-02-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-10-19T14:25:48+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":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"V.R. Rajakumaran vs B. Jayalakshmi on 12 February, 2002","datePublished":"2002-02-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-19T14:25:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002"},"wordCount":2852,"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\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002","name":"V.R. Rajakumaran vs B. Jayalakshmi on 12 February, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2002-02-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-19T14:25:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-r-rajakumaran-vs-b-jayalakshmi-on-12-february-2002#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"V.R. Rajakumaran vs B. Jayalakshmi on 12 February, 2002"}]},{"@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\/240563","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=240563"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/240563\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=240563"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=240563"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=240563"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}