{"id":257327,"date":"2007-01-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-01-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007"},"modified":"2018-06-11T12:32:15","modified_gmt":"2018-06-11T07:02:15","slug":"v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007","title":{"rendered":"V.Gunasekara Mudaliar vs M.Mohan on 25 January, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
V.Gunasekara Mudaliar vs M.Mohan on 25 January, 2007<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n           In the High Court of Judicature at Madras\n                              \n                      Dated:25.01.2007\n                              \n                            Coram\n                              \n    The Honourable Mr.Justice A.C.ARUMUGAPERUMAL ADITYAN\n                              \n                Second Appeal No.393 OF 1997\n                              \n\nV.Gunasekara Mudaliar\t\t\t\t....Appellant\n\n\n                              vs.\n\n1. M.Mohan\n2. M.Arumugham\n3. M.Sampath\n4. Karpagambal                               ..Respondents\n\n\n\n        Second appeal filed against the judgment and  decree\n\ndated  25.11.1996 made in A.S.No.108 of 1994 on the file  of\n\ncourt  of   Principal District Judge, North Arcot  District,\n\nVellore,   confirming   the  decree   and   Judgment   dated\n\n14.12.1993  in I.A.No.708 of 1990 in O.S.No.56 of  1989   on\n\nthe file of Sub Court, Vellore.\n\n\n          For Appellant   :     Mr.S.Balasubramanian\n          For Respondents :     Mr.Thiruchy R.Thiagarajan.\n\n                             ---\n\n\n\n                          JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
     This appeal has been preferred against the Judgment and<\/p>\n
decree  in  A.S.No.108 of 1994 on the file of the  Court  of<\/p>\n
Principal  District Judge, Vellore.  The  appellant  is  the<\/p>\n
plaintiff in O.S.No.56 of 1989 on the file of the  Court  of<\/p>\n
Subordinate Judge, Vellore.\n<\/p>\n
\n
      2.    The  suit was filed for partition of plaintiff’s<\/p>\n
1\/3rd  share  in the plaint schedule property. A preliminary<\/p>\n
decree for partition was passed allotting 1\/3rd share to the<\/p>\n
plaintiff and the remaining 2\/3rd share in the suit property<\/p>\n
to  the  defendants. Against the passing of the  preliminary<\/p>\n
decree,  there  was no appeal preferred by the  parties  and<\/p>\n
thus it become final. A petition for passing of final decree<\/p>\n
was filed in I.A.No.708 of 1990 in O.S.No.56 of 1989, and  a<\/p>\n
Commissioner was appointed and he filed Ex C1 report and  Ex<\/p>\n
C2   plan.   The  plaintiff  has  filed  objections  to  the<\/p>\n
Commissioner’s  report stating that a  frontage  of  4  feet<\/p>\n
alone  was given to him on the southern side,but it will  be<\/p>\n
inconvenient for him to enjoy his 1\/3rd share  which  is  an<\/p>\n
extent of 4 feet x 24 feet  in the plaint schedule property.<\/p>\n
According  to  the  plaintiff, it can  be  used  only  as  a<\/p>\n
pathway  and he cannot enjoy his share which is situated  in<\/p>\n
the suit property conveniently.\n<\/p>\n
\n
      3.  The  learned trial Judge considered the objections<\/p>\n
filed  by the plaintiff in accordance with Ex C1 and  Ex  C2<\/p>\n
and  after  rejecting the objections made by the  plaintiff,<\/p>\n
passed  final decree in terms of the preliminary decree  and<\/p>\n
in  accordance with Ex C1 report and Ex C2 plan.   Aggrieved<\/p>\n
by  the  findings of the learned trial Judge, the  plaintiff<\/p>\n
has  preferred  an appeal in A.S.NO.108 of 1994  before  the<\/p>\n
learned  first appellate Judge.  The learned first appellate<\/p>\n
Judge  also considered the objections made by the  plaintiff<\/p>\n
and  ultimately held that there is no valid  ground  in  the<\/p>\n
appeal and consequently dismissed the appeal confirming  the<\/p>\n
judgment and final decree passed by the lower Court  without<\/p>\n
costs.   Aggrieved by the  findings of the  first  appellate<\/p>\n
Court  in  A.S.No.108 of 1994, this second appeal  has  been<\/p>\n
preferred by the plaintiff.\n<\/p>\n
\n
      4.  The substantial questions of law involved in  this<\/p>\n
appeal are<\/p>\n
         “1.  Whether the judgment and decree  of<\/p>\n
         the Courts below are legally sustainable<\/p>\n
         inasmuch   as  they  have  not  properly<\/p>\n
         interpreted   the   sale   deed    dated<\/p>\n
         5.10.1981  in  favour of the  appellant,<\/p>\n
         wherein   the  appellant  has  purchased<\/p>\n
         1\/3rd share in the property?\n<\/p>\n
         2.  Whether the judgment and  decree  of<\/p>\n
         the Courts below are legally sustainable<\/p>\n
         inasmuch as it has accepted the mode  of<\/p>\n
         division of the property as given by the<\/p>\n
         Commissioner  without  consideration  of<\/p>\n
         the appellant for the same?<\/p>\n
\n
         3.  Whether the judgment and  decree  of<\/p>\n
         the     Courts    below   are    legally<\/p>\n
         sustainable  inasmuch as  they  rejected<\/p>\n
         the  application filed by the  appellant<\/p>\n
         under Section 2<\/a> of the Partition Act?\n<\/p>\n
         4.  Whether the judgment and  decree  of<\/p>\n
         the Courts below are legally sustainable<\/p>\n
         inasmuch as they have not considered the<\/p>\n
         aspect  of convenient enjoyment  of  the<\/p>\n
         property, when allotting 1\/3rd share?\n<\/p>\n
\n
     5.The Points:\n<\/p>\n
With  regard  to the allotment of 1\/3rd share in  the  final<\/p>\n
decree,  there  is absolutely no  objection  raised  by  the<\/p>\n
parties.  Only  with regard to the mode  of  partition,  the<\/p>\n
plaintiff has filed objection before the trial Court stating<\/p>\n
that   the   allotment  of  1\/3rd  share  by   the   learned<\/p>\n
Commissioner  on the western side towards the share  of  the<\/p>\n
plaintiff is not convenient for enjoyment.  According to the<\/p>\n
plaintiff, 4 feet allotted on the southern side in his 1\/3rd<\/p>\n
share is hardly insufficient to enjoy his 1\/3rd share and it<\/p>\n
can be used only as a passage. Along with the objection, the<\/p>\n
plaintiff  has filed a plan which shows that the   plaintiff<\/p>\n
should be allotted  6 feet frontage on the southern side  in<\/p>\n
the  1\/3rd share allotted to him and remaining 6 feet is  to<\/p>\n
be  allotted to the defendants.  The plaintiff has suggested<\/p>\n
that  while allotting six feet on the southern side  towards<\/p>\n
his  1\/3rd  share  ,  the total length on  the  north  south<\/p>\n
direction  may  be  reduced from 24 feet  to  16  feet.  The<\/p>\n
learned   trial  Judge,  while  passing  final  decree   has<\/p>\n
considered the said objections raised by the plaintiff,  but<\/p>\n
rejected  the  same on the ground that the Commissioner  has<\/p>\n
allotted  1\/3rd share of the plaintiff on the  western  side<\/p>\n
with  a  measurement of 4 feet x 24 feet.  The  Commissioner<\/p>\n
has  stated  in  his report Ex C1 that when plaint  schedule<\/p>\n
building   was measured on the east west, inclusive  of  two<\/p>\n
walls  on each side, the east  west measurement comes to  14<\/p>\n
feet.   But he had a doubt as to whether the walls on either<\/p>\n
sides   exclusively  belongs  to  the  plaintiff   and   the<\/p>\n
defendants  or is a common wall belonging to the parties  to<\/p>\n
the  suit on the one hand and neighbouring shop owners,  who<\/p>\n
are having shops on both sides of the suit properties on the<\/p>\n
other  hand. That is why the east west  measurement  in  the<\/p>\n
suit  property has been taken as 12 feet excluding the walls<\/p>\n
on  both  sides  and the Commissioner has  allotted  4  feet<\/p>\n
towards  1\/3rd  share  of the plaintiff  on  the  east  west<\/p>\n
direction  and remaining  8 feet was allotted towards  2\/3rd<\/p>\n
share  of  the  defendants on the east  west.   Taking  into<\/p>\n
consideration,  the objections filed by the  plaintiff,  the<\/p>\n
learned  trial  Judge has observed at  paragraph  7  of  his<\/p>\n
Judgment  that  as  per Ex A1 sale deed   the  plaintiff  is<\/p>\n
entitled  to  only 1\/3rd share in the suit property.  So  he<\/p>\n
will  be entitled to 4 feet width on the east west direction<\/p>\n
and  the  remaining  8 feet is to be allotted  only  to  the<\/p>\n
defendants  towards east west on the south.  This  has  been<\/p>\n
considered  by  the  Commissioner and  accordingly,  he  has<\/p>\n
allotted  the due shares of the parties with the above  said<\/p>\n
measurement of 4 feet x 24 feet to the plaintiff towards his<\/p>\n
1\/3rd  share,  8  feet x 24 feet to the  defendants  towards<\/p>\n
their 2\/3 share .  The trial Court is of the firm view  that<\/p>\n
if  6  feet is allotted to the plaintiff towards his   1\/3rd<\/p>\n
share  on  the  southern  side, it  will  be  affecting  the<\/p>\n
frontage  of  the  defendants and the said  loss  cannot  be<\/p>\n
compensated when allotting more area for the  defendants  in<\/p>\n
the  backyard of 1\/3rd share allotted to the plaintiff.  The<\/p>\n
appeal preferred by the plaintiff in A.S.No.108 of 1994  was<\/p>\n
also  dismissed on the same ground mentioned  in  the  final<\/p>\n
decree.  Under such circumstances, I do not find any  reason<\/p>\n
to  interfere with the well considered Judgment of the first<\/p>\n
appellate  Court in A.S.No.108 of 1994 on the  file  of  the<\/p>\n
Court of Principal District Judge, Vellore.<\/p>\n
      6.  In  fine,  the appeal is dismissed confirming  the<\/p>\n
decree and Judgment in A.S.No.108 of 1994 on the file of the<\/p>\n
Court   of  Principal  District  Judge,  Vellore.   In   the<\/p>\n
circumstances of the case, there is no order as to costs.<\/p>\n
sg<\/p>\n
To<\/p>\n
1. The Principal District Judge, Vellore<\/p>\n
2. The  Sub Court,Vellore.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court V.Gunasekara Mudaliar vs M.Mohan on 25 January, 2007 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated:25.01.2007 Coram The Honourable Mr.Justice A.C.ARUMUGAPERUMAL ADITYAN Second Appeal No.393 OF 1997 V.Gunasekara Mudaliar ….Appellant vs. 1. M.Mohan 2. M.Arumugham 3. M.Sampath 4. Karpagambal ..Respondents Second appeal filed against the judgment and decree dated 25.11.1996 made […]<\/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-257327","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nV.Gunasekara Mudaliar vs M.Mohan on 25 January, 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\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"V.Gunasekara Mudaliar vs M.Mohan on 25 January, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-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=\"2007-01-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-11T07:02:15+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\\\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"V.Gunasekara Mudaliar vs M.Mohan on 25 January, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-01-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-11T07:02:15+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1159,\"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-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007\",\"name\":\"V.Gunasekara Mudaliar vs M.Mohan on 25 January, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-01-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-11T07:02:15+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"V.Gunasekara Mudaliar vs M.Mohan on 25 January, 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":"V.Gunasekara Mudaliar vs M.Mohan on 25 January, 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\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"V.Gunasekara Mudaliar vs M.Mohan on 25 January, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-01-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-11T07:02:15+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\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"V.Gunasekara Mudaliar vs M.Mohan on 25 January, 2007","datePublished":"2007-01-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-11T07:02:15+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007"},"wordCount":1159,"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-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007","name":"V.Gunasekara Mudaliar vs M.Mohan on 25 January, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-01-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-11T07:02:15+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-gunasekara-mudaliar-vs-m-mohan-on-25-january-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"V.Gunasekara Mudaliar vs M.Mohan on 25 January, 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\/257327","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=257327"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/257327\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=257327"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=257327"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=257327"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}