{"id":258921,"date":"2008-10-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-10-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008"},"modified":"2017-09-03T08:38:47","modified_gmt":"2017-09-03T03:08:47","slug":"state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008","title":{"rendered":"State Of Tamil Nadu vs Srinivasan on 23 October, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">State Of Tamil Nadu vs Srinivasan on 23 October, 2008<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED : 23.10.2008\n\nCORAM:\n\nTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. PERIYA KARUPPIAH\n\nC.M.A.No.2847 of 2003\n\n1.State of Tamil Nadu\n  rep. by The District Collector,\n  Cuddalore.\n\n2.The District Superintendent of Police,\n  Cuddalore.\n\t\t\t\t\t\t... Appellants\nVs.\n1.Srinivasan\n\n2.Dhalayan\n... Respondents\n\n\tAppeal filed under <a href=\"\/doc\/147367599\/\" id=\"a_1\">Section 173<\/a> of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1998 against the judgment and decree dated 24.08.2002 made in M.C.O.P.No. 129 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accident Tribunal (Prl. Sub Court), Mayiladuthurai.\n\t\t\n\t\tFor Appellant\t\t: Mrs.P.Shanthi Rakkappan\n\t\t\t\t\t\t  Special Govt. Pleader (C.S.)\n\n\t\tFor Respondents\t: Mr.S.Soundar\n\t\t\t\t\t\t     for R1\n\t\n\nJ U D G M E N T \n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">\tThis appeal is filed at the instance of the State  against the award  dated 24.08.2002 made in M.C.O.P.No. 129 of 2001 on the file of the Motor Accident Tribunal (Prl. Sub Court), Mayiladuthurai.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">\t2. The case of the parties before the tribunal in brief is as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">\t(a) The claimant was a resident of Shrimushnam Village and was aged about 46 at the time of  the accident. He was a mechanic by profession.  On 15.05.2000, when  he was returning to his village along with the third  respondent  after attending a Wedding on a motor cycle TVS-50  bearing Regn. No. TN 46 3748, at about 8.45 a.m. as a pillion rider, a Trax Jeep bearing Regn. NO. TN 31 G 0140 belonging to the 2nd respondent Police Department,  which was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner  from South to North on Nagarapadi Village Lake Road, hit against the motor cycle and caused the accident. The claimant sustained  grievous injuries and he was rushed to JIPMER Hospital at Puducherry.  Due to injuries, he sustained permanent disability and had to face pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses. The accident had occurred only due to rash and negligence driving of the driver of the jeep belonging to the 2nd respondent and therefore, being the owners, the respondents 1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay a compensation of Rs.2,00,000\/- with interest.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">\t(b) The  2nd respondent filed thier counter denying the averments made in the petition and contending that the rider of the motor cycle on which the petitioner was traveling as a pillion alone responsible for the accident. The driver of the jeep was no way responsible for the accident. In fact, the case has been registered only against the third respondent and the same is pending.  Therefore, the third respondent alone liable to pay compensation. In any event, the petitioner is put to strict proof as to his age, avocation, income, injuries sustained in the accident and its impact in his life and the quantum of compensation sought for in the petition is exorbitant and excessive. The petition is liable to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">\t3.\tThe Tribunal after having considered the oral and documentary evidence available on record had passed an award of Rs.63,000\/-  with interest at 9% p.a. as against the claim of Rs.2,00,000\/-\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">\t4.  This appeal is preferred by the State  questioning  the findings as to the negligence as well the quantum of compensation.  The claimant who is the first respondent herein did not prefer any appeal or cross objection for enhancement of compensation.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">\t5. I have heard Mrs.P.Shanthi Rakkappan,  learned Special Government Pleader (C.S.)   appearing for the appellants and Mr.S.Sounthar, learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent\/claimant.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">\t6. The learned Special Government Pleader (C.S.) would submit that the tribunal had without considering  the evidence adduced on the side of the respondent simply, come to the conclusion that the driver of the jeep was responsible for the accident, whereas the rider of the motor cycle in which the claimant travelled in the pillion,  alone responsible for the accident. Therefore, the liability  cast upon the appellants is required to be set aside. She would further submit that in any event, the claimant had not sustained any permanent disability and the tribunal had without any basis, awarded a total compensation  of Rs.63,000\/- which is excessive.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">\t7. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent would, on the other hand, contend that  the tribunal on the basis of the evidence let in on the side of the claimant, had  rightly held that the driver of the jeep of the second respondent alone responsible for the accident and had also rightly fastened the liability upon the appellants directing them to pay a compensation of Rs.63,000\/- to the petitioner taking into account of the gravity of the injuries sustained by the claimant and the disability caused due to such injuries. The same does not require  any modification.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_9\">\t8. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments advanced on either side.  The happening of the  accident and the  sustaining of injuries by the claimant in the accident are not in dispute.  The contention of the appellants is that the  2nd respondent  herein, who rode the motor cycle in which the claimant travelled alone was responsible for the accident and  in any event the compensation awarded by the tribunal is without any basis and the same is on the higher side.   On a careful perusal of the evidence adduced before the tribunal on both sides, it  would show that the jeep involved in the accident belonged to the State and the driver of the jeep was also impleaded in the criminal case. The evidence regarding the facts and circumstances of the case was appraised  by the tribunal and the tribunal after having found that the tyre mark of the jeep for a long distance on the road, had rightly come to the conclusion  that the jeep driver was responsible for the cause of  accident. The said finding cannot be said to be wrong.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_10\">\t9. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.25,000\/- towards pain and sufferings and mental agony; a sum of Rs.30,000\/- towards permanent disability of 20%; a sum of Rs.6,000\/- towards temporary loss of income;  a sum of Rs.1,000\/- towards attendant&#8217;s charges; a sum of Rs.500\/- towards transport charges; and a sum of Rs.500\/- towards extra nutrition in all a  sum of Rs.63,000\/- to the claimant.  On a careful perusal of the Wound Certificate marked under Ex.A3, it could be seen that the claimant had sustained fracture on his right knee, loss of one tooth and also an injury on his lower lip.  For the said injuries, no doubt, he was taking treatment in JIPMER Hospital in Puducherry.  No doubt,  the claimant would have definitely undergone much pain and sufferings due to the said injuries. Therefore, on taking into consideration of the nature of injuries, the petitioner could be awarded a just and reasonable sum of Rs.10,000\/- towards pain and sufferings.  The Doctor who examined the claimant had assessed the permanent disability at 30% for the absence of movement of leg;  10% for mal-union of fractured bone in right knee; 10% for shortening  of leg in length and in all 50% of disability.  This Court could  therefore, see that his right leg was completely crippled due to fracture and the resultant disability.  The tribunal had not given any reason for having reduced the total percentage of disablement from 50% to 20%. If the percentage of 50% as spoken to by the Doctor is taken into consideration and a sum of Rs.1000\/- for every one percent of disability is granted, the petitioner is entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000\/- for the 50% of permanent  disability.  The temporary loss of income was said to have been assessed for the period of two months during the period, for which there is no evidence.   The tribunal had disbelieved the claim of the petitioner that he had under gone treatment for about two months and sustained monetary loss, as there was no document produced  on the side of the claimant.  However, the tribunal had assessed the temporary loss of income for two months and awarded a sum of Rs.6,000\/- which cannot be said to be correct.  At the best, taking into account the nature of injuries and the course of treatment, a sum of Rs.1000\/- towards loss of income, a sum of Rs.1000\/- towards attendants&#8217; charges and  a sum of Rs.500\/- each towards  transport and extra nourishment and in all a sum of Rs.63,000\/- could be awarded to the petitioner. Therefore, the total compensation compensation computed by the tribunal  is found to be just and reasonable and the same does not require any interference in this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_11\">\t10. The head-wise details of compensation to which the petitioner is entitled are furnished here below:-\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_12\">Head under which compensation awarded<br \/>\nCompensation awarded by the Tribunal<br \/>\nRs.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_13\">Compensation awarded by this Court<br \/>\nRs.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_14\">Pain and sufferings, shock and mental agony<br \/>\n25000<br \/>\n10000<br \/>\nDisability<br \/>\n30000<br \/>\n50000<br \/>\nLoss of Income<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">6000<\/span><br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">1000<\/span><br \/>\nAttendant&#8217;s charges<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_2\">1000<\/span><br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_3\">1000<\/span><br \/>\nTransport charges<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_4\">500<\/span><br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_5\">500<\/span><br \/>\nExtra Nourishment<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_6\">500<\/span><br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_7\">500<\/span><br \/>\nTotal<br \/>\n63000<br \/>\n63000<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_15\">\t11. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed and the award and decree passed by the tribunal stand confirmed.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_16\">kmk<\/p>\n<p>To <\/p>\n<p>The Prl. Sub Judge,<br \/>\nMotor Accident Tribunal,<br \/>\nMayiladuthurai<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court State Of Tamil Nadu vs Srinivasan on 23 October, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 23.10.2008 CORAM: THE HON&#8217;BLE MR. JUSTICE V. PERIYA KARUPPIAH C.M.A.No.2847 of 2003 1.State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The District Collector, Cuddalore. 2.The District Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore. &#8230; Appellants Vs. 1.Srinivasan [&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-258921","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 v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>State Of Tamil Nadu vs Srinivasan on 23 October, 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\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Of Tamil Nadu vs Srinivasan on 23 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-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=\"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-03T03:08:47+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\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Of Tamil Nadu vs Srinivasan on 23 October, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-03T03:08:47+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1405,\"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\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008\",\"name\":\"State Of Tamil Nadu vs Srinivasan on 23 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-03T03:08:47+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Of Tamil Nadu vs Srinivasan on 23 October, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"State Of Tamil Nadu vs Srinivasan on 23 October, 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\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Of Tamil Nadu vs Srinivasan on 23 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-03T03:08:47+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\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Of Tamil Nadu vs Srinivasan on 23 October, 2008","datePublished":"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-03T03:08:47+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008"},"wordCount":1405,"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\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008","name":"State Of Tamil Nadu vs Srinivasan on 23 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-03T03:08:47+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-tamil-nadu-vs-srinivasan-on-23-october-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Of Tamil Nadu vs Srinivasan on 23 October, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/258921","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=258921"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/258921\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=258921"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=258921"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=258921"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}