{"id":241086,"date":"2008-08-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008"},"modified":"2017-04-28T02:34:10","modified_gmt":"2017-04-27T21:04:10","slug":"hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"Hanumanppa vs Chikkannaiah on 28 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Hanumanppa vs Chikkannaiah on 28 August, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: S.R.Bannurmath & Gowda<\/div>\n
'THE HON'BLE MR. ausncs A;N_gV\u00a7__NU\"(\u00a7'\u00e9)i%>!3xLA'\u20ac\u00a7\u00a7C\u00a7!3\u00a7ii3\u00bbi\\V \n\nIN THE mean COURT 0F KARNATAKA AT BANC5ALOF1E..:\n\nEEATED THIS THE 23\"' DAY 05-' AUGUST, 20:3?\" ' '    \n\nPRESENT_m_\n\nTHE HOBFBLE MRJUSTICE s.R.:\"5At%iN$RMATi4    %'\n\n& V.\n\naggggg F1R\u00a7T_ 5 Pggg%%;;%\ufb01j;9_;3_1_.L\u00bb\u00a7L (29 ga  \n\nBETWEEN:\n\n1\n\nV \"'B\u00a7\u00e9\ufb01*A\u00a7A'H\u00ab'_\n S\/0v.LVATE..%wCi1INNAPPA\n.'_T.Ac;s13-Asot.IT_15s YEARS\n\nHANUMANPF}A--    V    -- \n5\/0 LATE H3\\NL.\u00a7M'AEAH~\u00e9   '   \nAGES AE<}U'"F.32..\u00a5EARS._,_  '\n\nRm: cH1xKA_a\u00a3._NAvAaA;..'i't\u00e9s-:\u00a71=va\u00a7;r\u00a7THAPURA\nH03iJ.,..TBAmGALag\u00a7zE :~a_Ca5m1" \n\nBYLAPPA V     ' --\n\ns\/0 LATE HANl5i't1}3.1Ai~\u20ac..  \n\nAGED ABOUT 35 'iF,ARS~--. %\n\nRim CHI'i<KA3ANAV\ufb01xRA; YESWANTHAPURA\n\u00a7tOl?:Lii, BANGALORE mmu mwx\n\n'R\/'IN CHIKKABANAVARA, YESWANTHAPURA\n\nA \u00bb..f1OBl.I.,.{5fKE'5lGALORE NORTH IKALUK\n\n900113. BYLAIAH\n\n\u00bb ; _S,'OV IXNANJAPPA\n\nAGED ABOUT 67 YEARS\n\n' Rm: CHIKKABANAVARA, YESWANTHAPURA\n\nHOBLI, BANGALORE NORU1 "IALUK\n\nHANUMAKKA\nSIO LATE MARIAWA\nMBED ABOUT 62 YEARS\n\n \n\n \n\n\n\n.4\n\nRIIN CHiKKABANAVARA, YESWANTHAPURA\nHOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK\n\nMUNIRAJU\nS\/O LATE CHIKKAMARAPPA\nAGED ABOUT 35 YEARS\n\nRIIN CHIKl<ABANAVARA,YESWANTHAPURA  V T'\n\nHOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK:-'  \n\ni'lANUMANTHARA.}U\nS\/0 LATE BYLANJANEYA\nAGED ABOUT 2? YEARS\n\nRAN CHIKKABANAVARA, YESW\ufb01xhfI'iiAPURA._V_   \u00e9  \n\nHOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH  \n\nBYLAPPA T\n5\/0 BVLANJANEYA __  \nAGEDABOUT 2?_YEARS......  2 .\n\nR\/IN CHIKKABA.N\ufb01wAR\u00a3i, vsswa\ufb01mgpum' \n\nHOBLI, BANc;ALo;'\u00a7;:a.i; \u00abQ1313 "i"'ALUK_  "V \n\nK RAMAN.iANE;YA,  \u00bb   =\n\n5\/0 LATE,WDDF<M:P5RAP?A" "\nAGEDVABOUTVT38 YEARS", ' _\n\nR\/IN c\ufb02IK:vaAB:;aAyARA4,%._YE.swANTHAPuRA\nH0Bu;_BANGALoR.E\u00abuusmg [ALUK\n\n - V    APPELLANTS\n(BY SR1: ;S~D_N PRR.-SAD,' MN. UMESH, SMT. M.B. YASHODA,\n\n1\n\n ~.(';i1.3;.x:\u00e9)x\u00a7\u20aci_reA1'.\u00e9i;H""\n\n$10 LATE Px\u00a7s'i"EL 3ADIYAPPA\nAGED :29 mans\nRXOF CHIKKABANAVARA, YESWANTHAPURA\n\n .. B;\u00a7wGm_0RE NORTH TALUK\n\n'  3AvAi_AKsi-miDEvAM MA\n'W10 (3 CHIKKANNAIAH\n\n_.'\u00a7AGED 72 vemzs\n\n\n\nR\/0? CHIKKABANAVARA, YESWANTHARJRA\nEANGALORE NORTH TALUK\n\nSMT NARASAMMA\nW\/0 LATE CHIKKA THIMMAIAH\n\nAGED 62 YEARS _ \nR\/OF CHIKKABANAVARA, YESWANTHAPURA ;\n3ANGAL{)RE NORTH 'l'"ALUi(  _ \u00e9  \nVEJAYAKUMAR  ' A.\n\nSID C CHIKKANNAIAH V \nAGED ABQUT 40 YEARS  \n\nR\/OF CHIKKABANAVASZA, vesvvaimi-5Pu\u00e9A--  ' \n\nBANGALORE NORTH I'Ai,\u00a7}K\n\nszzm1vAsAMum HY\n5\/0 GZCHEKKANNAIAH  V' A \nAGED ABOUT 37--YEARf3"'     % \n\nR\/OF CHIKKABMAVARA. '._\u00a5'ESwANTfiAP_.Ul\u00a7A'\n\nBANGALORE'\u00ab--N0:\u00a7'tjr; i.Aju._1K_  \n\nJAGADISH--{,\u00a7RAL!1) .. % ..\n\n510 G"C\ufb01I.KKANN'i%;IAH"'-.\u00bb \nAGet)AeouTg7yE.AR$  % %\nRIOF'CHIKKABA.'\\iP.VARA,;~ffE*SWANTHAPURA\nBANGALORE N(1RTHf m~.:,_u<- \n\n   \ns\/xi; cr~::KKATH1.M'MA1AH\nA(;Eu\u00bb_ABauT 45 YEA"\n\n  \u00ab Rx\/CF CHIKKAEANAVARA, YESWANTHAPURA\n BANAGAl_.ORE_NG.R'i"H m.uilaintiffs on 26.7.82 and in pursuance thereof, the\n\n \"i'ahsiidar, Benoaiore North Taluk, issued xnotice of\n\n\n\nevictien to the defendants to vacate and deliver \" \n\nof the re-granted properties en the ground \n\nare in contravention of Sec.5(3\u00a7j>AAtVof\"tn'e \n\ndefendants questioned the said con'rse'--of in' \n\nitos.2065?-660182, in which\"\"'t\u00abt\u00a7Vfie pieint_itfseWeVise\nirnpleaded as the respondentsi\u00a7'\"\"'iihisti\ufb01\ufb01ourt\u00e9\u00e9tnotiting the<\/pre>\n
fact that the mater is coxretred ‘the in the case
\nof LAKsHMAnnee:io9Ari__A’V’  KARNATAKA
\n(1931(1) i<L=:J"  petitioners are not
\nunauthevris\u00e9dr  Iiabie to be evicted
\nand hy:"*.an.'_ quashed the order<\/p>\n
impugned iiirtne  petittnin, to the extent it directed the<\/p>\n
 ..evict'i_o<n  the vrritvv-petitioners (defendants herein), from<\/p>\n
ht'\u00bb.theViands.,:_"'i5i1ve::"said order has become finai.<\/p>\n
  '  contention of the learned counsei for the<\/p>\n
 :apneiiants"\u00a7s that, pursuant to the said eviction notice, the<\/p>\n
 defendants were evicted and possession was deiivered to<\/p>\n
 predecessors of the plaintiffs and they have been in<\/p>\n
" Vcontinixous possession and enjoyment. In Kjupport of the<\/p>\n
said contentien, there is no ciear and specific pieadingn <\/p>\n
the piaint and neither in the Triai Cami: nor befeg"e–~\u00abt.his:13 <\/p>\n
Court, any materiai is aiso produced. 0n the cont.r,e}'3r,Vit::is._<\/p>\n
an admitted fact that the eviction notice itsei? f\u00e9\\ai}':'1,S 'eua.shed,r 'V, t if<\/p>\n
by this Court holding that they are_not iiehiie to  <\/p>\n
and thus, the defendants (writ petititniers) c6rtih'u~ed  be
\nin possession and en3'oymerift;~~..,_     it<\/p>\n
8. Learned counsei for”theZ’eh_peiiaVhts chiaitiends that,<\/p>\n
before the aerergeta71n4:saii\u00a7j\u00a79euic!hie theiiir written statement to<\/p>\n
the suit, the plaiht’ihes__tieeh\u00ab..re}ect.ed, which is iilegal. The
\ncontentions is’ devoid at  ‘herusai of Order VII Rule
\n11 CFC, makes “cie,er’that, the reievant facts which need<\/p>\n
ts he iuedkediiitizte’ fer  an appiication thereunder, is<\/p>\n
the’1evVerrr\u00a7en.tsj\u00bb..%ivnuthe~’piaint. The triai Court can exercise<\/p>\n
  pewter une:ier,i’iE~i*:Ae said provision, at any stage of the suit<\/p>\n
“dieters, contiiusion of trial. Fer the purpose of deciding<\/p>\n
 under Order VII Rules 11(3) and (d), the<\/p>\n
 in the piaint are materiai and the plea taken if<\/p>\n
 ang}, by the defendants in the written staternentgweuid he<\/p>\n
1,<\/p>\n
\/.\n<\/p>\n
,<\/p>\n
11<\/span><\/p>\n
and thereby the defendants have remained in  V.<\/p>\n
and enjoyment of the properties.\n<\/p>\n
10. Though the plain: contaiinio\u00e9iiz’ para  <\/p>\n
with regard to the cause of action to4’ine–suit, [t:ii.e’A’qu’asvti.o’nvi ‘V<\/p>\n
is, whether a reai cause of act\u00e9oifiias been ‘seifr  the
\npiaint or something pur\u00e9iy.’_iiiu_3o’iy’ ii;a.sV’V”‘Deen st\u00e9te\u00e9i with a
\nView to overcome the pro\ufb01t-ieions:’t:on.t\u00a7i’ned’__in Ruie :11 of<\/p>\n
Cirder V13: cpc, -is newf\u00e9:etti\u00e9oij_ip.os\u00a7\u00a7ion of iaw that,<\/p>\n
ciever d:faftin_d”oi.iea\u00a7ivng iiiiieivpns of cause of action, are not:
\npemwitteoin iaw and~–o’–ciee:f”‘ri’\u00a7nt to sue, snouid be shown<\/p>\n
in thejipiaint.’\u00e9\ufb02ifeaiiino of the piaint shows ‘that, there is<\/p>\n
 no’ r\u00e9ai rf>:\u00a5ius”e..\u00e9of actioniand what has been set out in the<\/p>\n
‘1r’:e!a:int’ i\u00e93:T*nAo’ivnVienV\u00a7.~ but iliusory. The plaintiffs having<\/p>\n
  aami:ieaV%i–ti\u00a7\u00a7i,’iV their predecessors had sold the suit.<\/p>\n
i3″\u00bb-‘~.__Vs\u00bbci}eduie,f\u00a7rope:ties in favour of the defendants and had<\/p>\n
  TV.:i;12ii’:ei3fA.’.\u00ab’with possession of the same and that the action of<\/p>\n
 Tahsiidar to evict the defendants having been<\/p>\n
  . Tqisestioned in this Court and the writ petition having been<\/p>\n
allowed quashing the eviction notice, in th\ufb01absence of<\/p>\n
14<\/span><\/p>\n
13. Learned counsel for_ th\u00a32’rr”appei-i4oa.oc4″‘oracec\u00a7j’. <\/p>\n
reliance on the decision of the Hon’b\u00a7oV S:-\u00a7o’rorrie  <\/p>\n
the case of ‘MAYAR (H.K.) LTD. A:~{o.oTHE’R$ ‘vs;}rov\u00a7{N’ERs:\n<\/p>\n
3. PARTIES, VESSEL r-mi. Foa*rio%NE’~–.c,oo_tEx\u00a7R’Ess _.3A:vo
\nomens’ reported in (2ooej–\u00a7sc:,:_ i\ufb01(}D fo.’:con’tend that, to
\nreject a plaint on the’   cause
\nof action, the \u00a7p%’aiivnj: read, since
\ncause of act.ion_A’i’s,.,f\u00e9’  are required to
\nbe prove\u00e9Vov.cofor’cr#$i$?f*i’i=\u00a7:Gcr’t’h\u00a7Hre::er. The said decision,<\/p>\n
primariiy was””roIatin g_ft o.’.suopression of rnateriai facts in<\/p>\n
_the plai,,n\u00a7. ‘V We haiiearcod rhe piaiht in its entirety. Except<\/p>\n
 i3.eiog=ac.Eo\u00a7.I\u00e9r\u00abc\u00a7ravfting, creating an iitusion of 3 cause of<\/p>\n
actioo;”._9_n “‘a\u00ab””rn\u00a7ear:i’rxgfui reading, it does not disciose a<\/p>\n
V vcause of’action; “considering the admitted facts of the case,<\/p>\n
 ‘:\u00a7’o’!:i:ced supra.\n<\/p>\n
 E14. The Triai Court considering the question<\/p>\n
 \ufb01fnether the plaint filed by the appeilants was Home to be<\/p>\n
 rejected under Order VII Ruie 110:1) of the Code, has heid<\/p>\n
that the same is barred by the provision of thm\ufb01uct. The<\/p>\n
X _<\/p>\n
16<\/span><\/p>\n
Triai Court with regard to its finciing under Orcier <\/p>\n
11(a) is correct, which itseif wouid be sufficieriA’ti_:'”fi;:ifAi.:i:ii\u00e9  M<\/p>\n
ultimate decision to dismiss this appeai. ”<\/p>\n
15. For the foregoing o\u00e9sc:si_fssioi\u00a7,.,_ia&e tiii\u00e9itiw tifla <\/p>\n
triai Court has rightiy arrived  i;onoiiis.iVo_ii’: tho: the
\npiaint does not disciose  oif’vA\u00e9c:;tijoiiA”‘to\u00bb \ufb01ie ti1 e suit.
\nThe litigation is, vexatieiisii.  “.i’s… ;:=;ifi\u00abs.’=:i*it|%s and
\ncorisequentiy, ii:   No ground is
\nmade out to    the appaai being<\/p>\n
without n}1eri!_:_. is; ‘iii.er\u00a7=._iiiy raj\u00e9\u00e9ied. _’<\/p>\n
Sd\ufb01\u00e9
\nIudgg<\/p>\n
Sdfw
\nJudge<\/p>\n
 “if ~sac.5′<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Hanumanppa vs Chikkannaiah on 28 August, 2008 Author: S.R.Bannurmath & Gowda ‘THE HON’BLE MR. ausncs A;N_gV\u00a7__NU”(\u00a7’\u00e9)i%>!3xLA’\u20ac\u00a7\u00a7C\u00a7!3\u00a7ii3\u00bbi\\V IN THE mean COURT 0F KARNATAKA AT BANC5ALOF1E..: EEATED THIS THE 23″‘ DAY 05-‘ AUGUST, 20:3?” ‘ ‘ PRESENT_m_ THE HOBFBLE MRJUSTICE s.R.:”5At%iN$RMATi4 %’ & V. aggggg F1R\u00a7T_ 5 Pggg%%;;%\ufb01j;9_;3_1_.L\u00bb\u00a7L (29 ga BETWEEN: 1 V “‘B\u00a7\u00e9\ufb01*A\u00a7A’H\u00ab’_ […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-241086","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nHanumanppa vs Chikkannaiah on 28 August, 2008 - 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\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Hanumanppa vs Chikkannaiah on 28 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-08-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-04-27T21:04:10+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\\\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Hanumanppa vs Chikkannaiah on 28 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-27T21:04:10+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":875,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008\",\"name\":\"Hanumanppa vs Chikkannaiah on 28 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-27T21:04:10+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Hanumanppa vs Chikkannaiah on 28 August, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Hanumanppa vs Chikkannaiah on 28 August, 2008 - 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\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Hanumanppa vs Chikkannaiah on 28 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-04-27T21:04:10+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\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Hanumanppa vs Chikkannaiah on 28 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-27T21:04:10+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008"},"wordCount":875,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008","name":"Hanumanppa vs Chikkannaiah on 28 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-27T21:04:10+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hanumanppa-vs-chikkannaiah-on-28-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Hanumanppa vs Chikkannaiah on 28 August, 2008"}]},{"@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\/241086","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=241086"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/241086\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=241086"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=241086"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=241086"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}