{"id":257270,"date":"2007-11-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-11-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007"},"modified":"2018-10-26T07:04:18","modified_gmt":"2018-10-26T01:34:18","slug":"chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007","title":{"rendered":"Chembayil Veeran vs Cherichiyil Ummer on 28 November, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Chembayil Veeran vs Cherichiyil Ummer on 28 November, 2007<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRSA No. 629 of 2006()\n\n\n1. CHEMBAYIL VEERAN,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. VILAKKANDATHIL PATHUMMAKUTTY,\n3. RAZIYABI,\n4. SAINABA,\n5. RAMLABI,\n6. SAUDABI,\n7. SHAJI,\n8. SARABHANU,\n9. ULLAKKAL MOIDEENKUTTY,\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. CHERICHIYIL UMMER,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.K.SURESH KUMAR\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR\n\n Dated :28\/11\/2007\n\n O R D E R\n                 M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.\n                   ...........................................\n                   R.S.A.No.629              OF       2006\n                   ............................................\n     DATED THIS THE 28th                DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2007\n\n                              JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
      Defendants and legal heirs of deceased 2nd defendant in<\/p>\n
O.S.211 of 1993 on the file of Munsiff Court, Parappanangadi are<\/p>\n
the    appellants. Respondent is the plaintiff.                  Respondent<\/p>\n
instituted the suit seeking a decree for permanent prohibitory<\/p>\n
injunction in respect of item No.1 of plaint schedule property.<\/p>\n
Item No.1 of the plaint schedule property admittedly belongs to<\/p>\n
respondent under Ext.A10 assignment deed and A3 surrender<\/p>\n
deed and Ext.B1 partition deed. Item No.2 of plaint schedule<\/p>\n
property which lies to the west of item No.1 of the plaint<\/p>\n
schedule property admittedly belongs to appellants and it is item<\/p>\n
No.2 of Ext.B1 property. The dispute is with regard to the exact<\/p>\n
boundary which separates item No.1 of plaint schedule property<\/p>\n
from item No.2 of plaint schedule property.                      Respondents<\/p>\n
contended that there is a compound wall on the west of item<\/p>\n
No.1 of plaint schedule property, which is separating the<\/p>\n
boundary and respondents are in possession of the property<\/p>\n
which lies to the east of the compound wall. Contending that<\/p>\n
appellants are attempting to trespass into the property, a decree<\/p>\n
RSA 629\/2006                     2<\/span><\/p>\n
for injunction was sought.       Appellants    resisted the suit<\/p>\n
contending that the measurement shown in respect of item No.1<\/p>\n
of plaint schedule proeprty is not correct and executant No.1 of<\/p>\n
Ext.B1 partition deed was only alloted 12 cents and therefore<\/p>\n
respondent is not entitled to claim right over 13 = cents and<\/p>\n
respondent is not entitled to the decree sought for. It was also<\/p>\n
contended that the existing compound wall is not the boundary<\/p>\n
which separates the property of respondent and appellants and<\/p>\n
appellants have property further to the east of the compound<\/p>\n
wall and when appellants attempted to put up a boundary<\/p>\n
enclosing their property, the dispute arose and the suit was filed.<\/p>\n
     2.     Learned Munsiff, on the evidence of PW1, DW1,<\/p>\n
Exts.A1 to A10, B1 to B3 and C1 to C6, dismissed the suit<\/p>\n
holding that item No.1 of plaint schedule property was not<\/p>\n
properly identified and though the Commissioner in Ext.C3 plan<\/p>\n
demarcated item No.1 of the plaint schedule property as plot<\/p>\n
ABCDEFGH, it is not proved to be the property obtained under<\/p>\n
Ext.B1 and therefore respondent is not entitled to the decree<\/p>\n
sought for. Respondent challenged the judgment before Sub<\/p>\n
Court, Tirur in A.S.158 of 1996.        Learned Sub Judge, on<\/p>\n
reappreciation of evidence, found that Ext.C3 plan shows that<\/p>\n
RSA 629\/2006                    3<\/span><\/p>\n
there is an old compound wall through FGHA line and the<\/p>\n
property which lies to the east of that compound wall is in the<\/p>\n
possession of respondent and to the west is the property of<\/p>\n
appellants. Learned Sub Judge also found that though there is<\/p>\n
difference in the measurement and extent shown in Ext.B1 with<\/p>\n
regard to item No.1 of plaint schedule property, that is the case<\/p>\n
with item No.2 of the plaint schedule property also and the<\/p>\n
middle measurement tallies with the plot as demarcated by the<\/p>\n
Commissioner and therefore granted a decree for injunction<\/p>\n
accepting Ext.C3 plan. It is challenged in the second appeal.<\/p>\n
     3. Learned counsel appearing for appellants was heard.<\/p>\n
The argument of the learned counsel is that the right obtained<\/p>\n
by respondent is the right which was available under Ext.B1 and<\/p>\n
the property claimed by respondent is item No.1 of Ext.B1 and<\/p>\n
the extent is only 12 cents and not 13 = cents as shown in<\/p>\n
Ext.A10 and therefore respondent is not entitled to a decree for<\/p>\n
injunction in respect of the larger extent. Learned counsel also<\/p>\n
argued that FGHA is not the boundary line which separates the<\/p>\n
property of respondent and appellants and that compound wall<\/p>\n
was in existence even before Ext.B1 partition deed and item<\/p>\n
No.2 of the plaint schedule property is inclusive of the property<\/p>\n
RSA 629\/2006                    4<\/span><\/p>\n
which lies to the east of that compound wall and therefore<\/p>\n
respondent is not entitled to the decree granted by the courts<\/p>\n
below.\n<\/p>\n
     4.    On hearing the learned counsel, I do not find any<\/p>\n
substantial question of law involved in the appeal.      The suit<\/p>\n
being one for injunction simplicitor, question is only whether<\/p>\n
respondent established his possession of item No.1 of plaint<\/p>\n
schedule property.    True, identity of the property is also a<\/p>\n
relevant aspect to be looked into.     The property claimed by<\/p>\n
respondent is item No.1 of Ext.B1 partition deed. The property<\/p>\n
claimed by appellants which lies to the west of that property is<\/p>\n
item No.2 of Ext.B1 partition deed. Learned Munsiff and learned<\/p>\n
Sub Judge, on analyising the evidence, found that the properties<\/p>\n
alloted as item No.1 and 2 of Ext.B1 partition deed cannot be<\/p>\n
fixed with regard to the measurement shown therein as<\/p>\n
admittedly there is a mistake in the measurements. It is in such<\/p>\n
circumstances, first appellate court found that existence of a<\/p>\n
compound wall in FGHA line is established indicative of<\/p>\n
possession and existence of the bathroom and latrine which lies<\/p>\n
to the east of compound wall within the property claimed by<\/p>\n
appellants establish possession of that portion of the property by<\/p>\n
RSA 629\/2006                    5<\/span><\/p>\n
respondent. As rightly found by first appellate court even if<\/p>\n
case of appellants that a compound wall FGHA as marked in<\/p>\n
Ext.C3 plan was available even before Ext.B1 partition deed and<\/p>\n
while dividing the property the compound wall does not form the<\/p>\n
exact boundary of item No.1 and 2 of the properties covered<\/p>\n
under Ext.B1, normally immediately after the partition the<\/p>\n
compound wall would be demolished and new wall would be<\/p>\n
constructed on the exact boundary of the property. The learned<\/p>\n
Sub Judge also found that if in fact the property which lies<\/p>\n
immediate to the east of that compound wall belongs to<\/p>\n
appellants as claimed by them, they would not have permitted<\/p>\n
respondent to construct a bathroom or latrine which admittedly<\/p>\n
exist in that property. It is for these reasons, first appellate<\/p>\n
court found that respondent is in possession of the plaint<\/p>\n
schedule property which lies to the east of FGHA line. In such<\/p>\n
circumstances, a decree for injunction was granted. I do not find<\/p>\n
any reason to interfere with that decree. But as the dispute is<\/p>\n
with regard to the the exact property covered under Ext.B1 and<\/p>\n
the title to the property could be fixed only by identifying item<\/p>\n
No.1 and 2 of the plaint schedule properties and that is not done,<\/p>\n
it is made clear that the decision in this suit will not prevent<\/p>\n
RSA 629\/2006                    6<\/span><\/p>\n
appellants from seeking a decree based on title.<\/p>\n
     Appeal is dismissed in limine.\n<\/p>\n
\n
                     `    M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE\n\nlgk\/-\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Chembayil Veeran vs Cherichiyil Ummer on 28 November, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RSA No. 629 of 2006() 1. CHEMBAYIL VEERAN, … Petitioner 2. VILAKKANDATHIL PATHUMMAKUTTY, 3. RAZIYABI, 4. SAINABA, 5. RAMLABI, 6. SAUDABI, 7. SHAJI, 8. SARABHANU, 9. ULLAKKAL MOIDEENKUTTY, Vs 1. CHERICHIYIL UMMER, … Respondent For […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-257270","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nChembayil Veeran vs Cherichiyil Ummer on 28 November, 2007 - 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\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Chembayil Veeran vs Cherichiyil Ummer on 28 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-11-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-26T01:34:18+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Chembayil Veeran vs Cherichiyil Ummer on 28 November, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-11-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-26T01:34:18+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1088,\"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\\\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007\",\"name\":\"Chembayil Veeran vs Cherichiyil Ummer on 28 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-11-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-26T01:34:18+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Chembayil Veeran vs Cherichiyil Ummer on 28 November, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"Chembayil Veeran vs Cherichiyil Ummer on 28 November, 2007 - 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\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Chembayil Veeran vs Cherichiyil Ummer on 28 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-11-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-26T01:34:18+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Chembayil Veeran vs Cherichiyil Ummer on 28 November, 2007","datePublished":"2007-11-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-26T01:34:18+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007"},"wordCount":1088,"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\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007","name":"Chembayil Veeran vs Cherichiyil Ummer on 28 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-11-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-26T01:34:18+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chembayil-veeran-vs-cherichiyil-ummer-on-28-november-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Chembayil Veeran vs Cherichiyil Ummer on 28 November, 2007"}]},{"@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\/257270","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=257270"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/257270\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=257270"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=257270"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=257270"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}