{"id":247424,"date":"2008-03-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-03-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008"},"modified":"2016-05-04T15:16:38","modified_gmt":"2016-05-04T09:46:38","slug":"the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008","title":{"rendered":"The Government Of Tamil Nadu vs G.Thirupathi on 25 March, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">The Government Of Tamil Nadu vs G.Thirupathi on 25 March, 2008<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 25\/03\/2008\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA\n\nC.M.A.(MD) No.975 of 2001\n\n1.The Government of Tamil Nadu,\n  represented by its\n  District Collector,\n  Madurai.\n\n2.The District Rural Development\n  Project Officer,\n  Madurai District,\n  Madurai.\t\t\t\t.. Appellants\n\nVs\n\nG.Thirupathi\t\t     \t\t.. Respondent\n\n\nPrayer\n\nAppeal filed under <a href=\"\/doc\/147367599\/\" id=\"a_1\">Section 173<\/a> of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the\nJudgment and Decree dated 16.10.2000 passed in M.A.T.C.O.P.No.1247 of 1995 by\nthe Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum IV Additional Sub Judge, Madurai.\n\n!For Appellants\t\t... Mr.So.Paramasivam,\n\t\t\t    Government Pleader.\n\n^For Respondent\t\t... Mr.K.Mahendran for\n\t\t\t\tMr.S.Gunalan\n\n:JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">\tThis appeal is focussed as against the Judgment and Decree dated<br \/>\n16.10.2000 passed in M.A.T.C.O.P.No.1247 of 1995 by the Motor Accidents Claims<br \/>\nTribunal cum IV Additional Sub Judge, Madurai.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">\t2. The challenge in this appeal is to the liability fixed on the driver of<br \/>\nthe Government  Jeep and also to the quantum of compensation awarded by the<br \/>\nTribunal.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">\t3. The nitty-gritty of the grounds of appeal as stood exposited from the<br \/>\nMemorandum of Appeal would run thus:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">\tThere was enormous delay in lodging the F.I.R, but the Tribunal simply<br \/>\nignored it.  Without any valid reason, the evidence of R.W.1, the driver of the<br \/>\nGovernment Jeep was rejected.  The Government Jeep did not involve in the<br \/>\naccident at all.  The monthly income of the injured was arbitrarily fixed at<br \/>\nRs.1,250\/- p.m.  The compensation awarded is on the higher side.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">\t4. The points for consideration are:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">\t(i) Whether the appellant Government Jeep involved in the accident or not?\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">\t(ii) Whether the compensation awarded is on the higher side?\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">Point No:(i)\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">\t5. The learned Government Pleader drawing the attention of this Court to<br \/>\nEx.P.1, the certified copy of the F.I.R concerned, would advance his argument to<br \/>\nthe effect that even though the accident had occurred on 13.02.1995, nonetheless<br \/>\nthe F.I.R was lodged only on 17.02.1995 and absolutely, there is no explanation<br \/>\nfor the delay;  R.W.1, the driver of the Government Jeep cogently and coherently<br \/>\ndeposed before the Court highlighting that it was he who helped at the<br \/>\ninsistence of the mob in taking the injured to the Visaka Hospital near Periyar<br \/>\nBus Stand; however, the injured without having any gratitude, simply turned<br \/>\nturtle and put the blame on the very driver of the Government Jeep and<br \/>\naccordingly, he prays for exonerating the Government from the liability to pay<br \/>\nthe compensation.  He would also submit that the compensation is on the higher<br \/>\nside.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_9\">\t6. Whereas the learned Counsel for the claimant drawing the attention of<br \/>\nthis Court to the order of the Tribunal, would advance his argument that the<br \/>\nTribunal correctly in accordance with the law analysed the evidence of R.W.1 and<br \/>\nlooked askance at it and in such a case, the evidence of R.W.1 cannot be relied<br \/>\non for exonerating the appellant from paying the compensation.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_10\">\t7. This is a peculiar case by itself.  The Government would come forward<br \/>\nwith a stand as though a mob stopped the Government Jeep and compelled the<br \/>\ndriver of the Jeep to take the injured who allegedly sustained injuries in some<br \/>\nother accident to the Hospital.  Whereupon, the driver of the Jeep hesitatingly<br \/>\ntook him to one Visaka Hospital and thereafter, he left the place.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_11\">\t8. No doubt, there is delay in lodging the F.I.R.  The core question<br \/>\narises as to whether that would be fatal to the case of the claimant.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_12\">\t9. The claimant in the F.I.R itself would state that the driver of the<br \/>\noffending vehicle namely, the appellant&#8217;s Jeep driver after causing the<br \/>\naccident, took the injured in the same vehicle and left him in his house;<br \/>\nthereafter, he got himself admitted in Jawahar Hospital with the help of his<br \/>\nfather as revealed by Ex.P.2; while he was taking treatment, the police came and<br \/>\nrecorded his statement and thereafter the police registered the F.I.R.  Ex.P.2,<br \/>\nis the copy of the wound certificate issued by P.W.2, the Doctor concerned which<br \/>\nwould contain the following details:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_13\">\t&#8220;The injured person was first seen by the undersigned at 08.00 p.m on the<br \/>\n13.02.1995 and the examination was conducted at 08.05 p.m on 13.02.1995 when the<br \/>\nfollowing injuries were found:&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_14\">\t10. As such, it shows that the injured was admitted in Jawahar Hospital on<br \/>\n13.02.1995 at about 08.05 p.m, as he sustained the following injuries:<br \/>\n\t&#8220;(1) A sutured wound 3 c.m in length over right upper eye lid. (2) A<br \/>\nsutured wound over right ear 5 cm in length.(3) Swelling Reformity and abnormal<br \/>\nmobility of right leg. X-ray right leg shows fractured both bones of right leg<br \/>\nat the function of upper 2\/3 and lower 1\/3 level.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_15\">\t11. The learned Counsel for the claimant placing reliance on the<br \/>\ndeposition of the Doctor of the Jawahar Hospital namely Dr.Narayanasamy, P.W.2,<br \/>\nand would submit that the Doctor clearly detailed about the factum of injured<br \/>\nhaving been admitted in the Hospital and also about the history recorded by him<br \/>\nafter ascertaining the particulars from the injured.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_16\">\t12. As such, the author of Ex.P.2 was examined.  He also with reference to<br \/>\nthe Medical Bills issued by the Hospital, deposed before the Court. [Obviously<br \/>\nwhile the Tribunal getting typed the deposition of P.W.2 wrongly referred to the<br \/>\nexhibit numbers.]<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_17\">\t13. Even though, during cross-examination, it was suggested to P.W.2 that<br \/>\nthose medical documents were cooked up ones, nonetheless I could see no<br \/>\ngenuineness in the suggestion as the Doctor had axe to grind in the matter and<br \/>\nit was he who treated the injured at the earliest point of time.  However,   the<br \/>\ndeposition of R.W.1, the driver of the Jeep would be that from the accident<br \/>\nspot, it was he who took the injured to Visaka Hospital, but here, it was in<br \/>\nJawahar Hospital, P.W.1 took treatment.  It is the case of P.W.1 that the<br \/>\ninjured was taken neither to Visaka Hospital nor to Jawahar Hospital by R.W.1,<br \/>\nbut to his house only and that P.W.1 with the help of his father got admitted in<br \/>\nJawahar Hospital.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_18\">\t14. As such, it has to be seen as to whether the evidence of R.W.1 is<br \/>\nbelievable or not?\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_19\">\t15. R.W.1 being the driver of the Government Jeep cannot be heard to say<br \/>\nthat some mob threatened him and he danced to the tune of them and that too when<br \/>\nthe Higher Official concerned was inside the Jeep.  At least, that Higher<br \/>\nOfficer could have been examined before the Tribunal to highlight as to what had<br \/>\nactually happened.  Furthermore, one other vital point is that the police is one<br \/>\nother Government&#8217;s agency which registered the F.I.R.  Had really that F.I.R was<br \/>\na false one, it is not known as to why the Officer travelled in the Jeep had not<br \/>\ninformed the Police to refer the case as false and simultaneously,  requested<br \/>\nthe Police to take action as against the individual for having lodged such false<br \/>\nF.I.R.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_20\">\t16. This itself would clearly demonstrate that the respondent&#8217;s plea is<br \/>\nonly an afterthought just for wriggling out of its liability.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_21\">\t17. It is a trite proposition of law that while adjudicating the matters<br \/>\nrelating to the accident and awarding compensation, the preponderance of<br \/>\nprobabilities should be considered.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_22\">\t18. Here, for the reasons set out supra, the probabilities are found to be<br \/>\nin favour of the claimant and as against the driver of the Government Jeep as<br \/>\nwell as the Government.  Accordingly, Point No.(i) is decided to the effect that<br \/>\nthe Government Jeep alone caused the accident and in that process, the claimant<br \/>\nsustained those injuries.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_23\">Point No:(ii)<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_24\">\t19. The learned Government Pleader would submit that the compensation<br \/>\nawarded is on the higher side. Whereas the learned Counsel for the claimant<br \/>\nwould submit that the compensation should have been  awarded much more than what<br \/>\nwas awarded by the Tribunal.  Ex.P.2, the wound certificate, coupled with<br \/>\nEx.P.9, the disability certificate, would  demonstrate that the claimant<br \/>\nsustained 40% permanent disability.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_25\">\t20. P.W.3, the Doctor who issued Ex.P.9 would speak about the permanent<br \/>\ndisability sustained by the claimant.  According to him, the claimant sustained<br \/>\n40% permanent disability.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_26\">\t21. No doubt, taking a cue from the Schedule I, Part II, Serial No.20 of<br \/>\nthe Workmen&#8217;s <a href=\"\/doc\/1113485\/\" id=\"a_1\">Compensation Act<\/a>, 1923, if the matter is viewed, amputation below<br \/>\nknee could be assessed at 50%, but here, for the fracture only, it is assessed<br \/>\nas 40% and it could be assessed at 30%.  Be that as it may, it had no impact on<br \/>\nthe ultimate compensation awarded by the Tribunal.  The Tribunal awarded under<br \/>\nvarious sub-heads, the total compensation of Rs.70,250\/-.  For pain and<br \/>\nsufferings, a sum of Rs.10,000\/- and towards permanent disability, a sum of<br \/>\nRs.35,000\/- were awarded.  Adhering to the dictum of the Honourable Apex Court<br \/>\nin Cholan Roadways Corporation Ltd., rep. by its Managing Director, Kumbakonam-<br \/>\n612 001 v. Ahmed Thambi and others reported in 2006(4) CTC 433, there should not<br \/>\nbe duplication in awarding of compensation under two sub-heads.  I am of the<br \/>\nconsidered opinion, based on the permanent disability, a sum of Rs.45,000\/-<br \/>\ncould be awarded towards loss of earning capacity.  Towards loss of earning,<br \/>\nduring the treatment period and the convalescent period, the Tribunal awarded a<br \/>\nsum of Rs.6,250\/- which in my opinion is just and proper.  Even though in the<br \/>\ngrounds of appeal, it was stated that the injured might not have earned<br \/>\nRs.1,250\/- p.m, nevertheless I am of the considered view that a coolie during<br \/>\nthe year 1995 might have earned at least a sum of Rs.1,000\/- p.m and he might<br \/>\nnot have been able to earn at least for six months so to say, during the<br \/>\ntreatment period and convalescent period.  The Tribunal quantified at Rs.6,250\/-<br \/>\nunder that caption which warrants no interference.  Under other sub-heads also,<br \/>\nthe compensation awarded is moderate which also require no modification.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_27\">\t22. In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed,<br \/>\nconfirming the Judgment and Decree dated 16.10.2000 passed in<br \/>\nM.A.T.C.O.P.No.1247 of 1995 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum IV<br \/>\nAdditional Sub Judge, Madurai.  The interest at the rate of 12% per annum<br \/>\nawarded by the Tribunal is reduced to 9%  per annum as per the prevailing rate<br \/>\nof interest.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_28\">rsb<\/p>\n<p>To<br \/>\nThe Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal cum<br \/>\nIV Additional Sub Judge,<br \/>\nMadurai.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court The Government Of Tamil Nadu vs G.Thirupathi on 25 March, 2008 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25\/03\/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA C.M.A.(MD) No.975 of 2001 1.The Government of Tamil Nadu, represented by its District Collector, Madurai. 2.The District Rural Development Project Officer, Madurai District, Madurai. .. Appellants [&hellip;]<\/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-247424","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>The Government Of Tamil Nadu vs G.Thirupathi on 25 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Government Of Tamil Nadu vs G.Thirupathi on 25 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-03-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-04T09:46:38+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Government Of Tamil Nadu vs G.Thirupathi on 25 March, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-03-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-04T09:46:38+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1640,\"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\\\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008\",\"name\":\"The Government Of Tamil Nadu vs G.Thirupathi on 25 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-03-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-04T09:46:38+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Government Of Tamil Nadu vs G.Thirupathi on 25 March, 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":"The Government Of Tamil Nadu vs G.Thirupathi on 25 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Government Of Tamil Nadu vs G.Thirupathi on 25 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-03-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-04T09:46:38+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Government Of Tamil Nadu vs G.Thirupathi on 25 March, 2008","datePublished":"2008-03-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-04T09:46:38+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008"},"wordCount":1640,"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\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008","name":"The Government Of Tamil Nadu vs G.Thirupathi on 25 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-03-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-04T09:46:38+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-government-of-tamil-nadu-vs-g-thirupathi-on-25-march-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Government Of Tamil Nadu vs G.Thirupathi on 25 March, 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\/247424","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=247424"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/247424\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=247424"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=247424"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=247424"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}