{"id":260742,"date":"2010-01-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-01-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010"},"modified":"2015-12-29T09:26:04","modified_gmt":"2015-12-29T03:56:04","slug":"v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010","title":{"rendered":"V.C. Yousuff vs K.P.Sameer Kumar on 25 January, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
V.C. Yousuff vs K.P.Sameer Kumar on 25 January, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRCRev..No. 172 of 2005()\n\n\n1. V.C. YOUSUFF, S\/O. AHAMMED KUTTY,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. K.P.SAMEER KUMAR, S\/O. ACHUTHAN,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.KHALID\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.N.NAGARESH\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM\n\n Dated :25\/01\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n        PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ.\n                    ----------------------------------\n\n                      R.C.R. No.172 of 2005\n\n                    ----------------------------------\n              Dated this the 25th day of January, 2010\n\n\n                              O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
                             —————\n<\/p>\n
Pius C.Kuriakose,J.\n<\/p>\n
            Landlord is in appeal.          He sought to evict the<\/p>\n
respondent tenant on the ground of arrears of rent, and<\/p>\n
bonafide need for own occupation. The ground of arrears of<\/p>\n
rent does not survive for consideration. The need projected<\/p>\n
in the context of sub-section 3 of Section 11 was that the<\/p>\n
building is required bonafide for occupation by his son Abdul<\/p>\n
Rahoof so that he can start a business in furniture. It was<\/p>\n
averred that Sri. Abdul Rahoof is unemployed and is without<\/p>\n
any means of livelihood. Bonafides of the claim was disputed<\/p>\n
by the respondent who also contended that the Rent Control<\/p>\n
Petition is liable to fail by virtue of the first proviso to Section<\/p>\n
11(3). It was also contended that the tenant is entitled to the<\/p>\n
protection of the second proviso to Section 11(3) and for that<\/p>\n
reason also the Rent Control Petition is liable to be dismissed<\/p>\n
even if the need is found to be bonafide. Evidence before the<\/p>\n
Rent Control Court consisted of Ext.A1 & A2, B1 property tax<\/p>\n
assessment register pertaining to building having door<\/p>\n
Nos.239 & 240 belonging to the landlord, Ext.X1 and the oral<\/p>\n
RCR.172\/05-D
\n                                 2<\/span><\/p>\n
evidence of PW1 the landlord, PW2 Abdul Rahoof and PW3<\/p>\n
the tenant in occupation of building No.239. On the side of<\/p>\n
the tenant his brother was examined as RW1. The Rent<\/p>\n
Control Court on evaluating the evidence on record came to<\/p>\n
the conclusion that the need was not bonafide. It was also<\/p>\n
held on the basis of Ext.B1 that landlord was having vacant<\/p>\n
position of two building and therefore Rent Control Petition<\/p>\n
was liable to be dismissed. The Rent Control Court however<\/p>\n
did not consider the tenant’s eligibility for the protection of<\/p>\n
the second proviso to Section 11(3). Ultimately the Rent<\/p>\n
Control Court dismissed the RCP. The appellate authority<\/p>\n
re-appraised the evidence and concurred with the conclusion<\/p>\n
of the Rent Control Court as regards to the bonafide of the<\/p>\n
needs and also as regards to the operation of the first proviso<\/p>\n
to Section 11(3).     That authority, however, on analysing<\/p>\n
evidence came to the conclusion that the tenant is not<\/p>\n
entitled for second proviso to Section 11(3). However in<\/p>\n
view of the earlier findings the appellate authority dismissed<\/p>\n
the appeal.\n<\/p>\n
      2.   In this revision, various grounds are raised<\/p>\n
assailing the judgment of the appellate authority and we<\/p>\n
have heard submissions of Mr. Sajid, learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellant and those of Mr.K. Babu, learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
RCR.172\/05-D
\n                                3<\/span><\/p>\n
respondent.     Mr.Sajid has drawn our attention to the<\/p>\n
evidence of PW3 and that of RW1. According to counsel it<\/p>\n
was clear from these two depositions that building No.239 is<\/p>\n
under occupation of the tenant and that the building No.240<\/p>\n
is too small for PW2 to occupy. Findings of the court below<\/p>\n
in the context of first proviso to Section 11(3) is highly<\/p>\n
improper. Learned counsel submitted that PW1 and PW2<\/p>\n
have uniformly stated that the son of PW2 is without any<\/p>\n
business of his own and that he needs genuinely to do<\/p>\n
business so that he can have his own independent income.<\/p>\n
Learned counsel further submitted on the basis of RW1’s<\/p>\n
testimony that RW1 confessed that he had no documents to<\/p>\n
prove the contention that PW2 was having any interest in the<\/p>\n
sawmill business which belongs to his father only. All the<\/p>\n
above submissions of the learned counsel were opposed by<\/p>\n
Mr.Babu who supported judgment of the appellate authority.<\/p>\n
Mr.Babu submitted that PW1 had filed earlier Rent Control<\/p>\n
Petition in respect of another room urging the bonafide need<\/p>\n
of his daughter. In that case while examined as PW1 he had<\/p>\n
stated very clearly that PW2 in the present case is<\/p>\n
conducting the sawmill business. In the teeth of such an<\/p>\n
admission it was for PW1 and 2 to prove that PW2 is no<\/p>\n
longer conducting the sawmill. The learned counsel also<\/p>\n
RCR.172\/05-D
\n                                4<\/span><\/p>\n
referred to Ext.B1 and submitted that B1 is a document as<\/p>\n
envisaged by Section 26 of Act 2 of 1965. Therefore it is<\/p>\n
obligatory on the part of the landlord to have taken out a<\/p>\n
commission and have proved that the building having door<\/p>\n
No.239 is not vacant and also that building No.240 is<\/p>\n
unsuitable for PW2’s purpose. Learned counsel would attack<\/p>\n
the findings of the appellate authority that the tenant is not<\/p>\n
entitled for protection to second proviso to sub-section 3 of<\/p>\n
Section 11.\n<\/p>\n
      3.   We    have   very   anxiously   considered    rival<\/p>\n
submissions. We do not find any illegality, irregularity or<\/p>\n
impropriety in the decision of the authorities below that the<\/p>\n
need is not bonafide. Such a decision was entered mainly<\/p>\n
relying on the circumstance that PW1 had admitted in<\/p>\n
previous case that it is his son PW1 who is conducting<\/p>\n
sawmill. PW2 is evidently at least assisting his father. When<\/p>\n
the father himself had submitted that PW2 is conducting<\/p>\n
sawmill it is for PW1 and 2 to prove by adducing cogent<\/p>\n
evidence that PW2 has nothing to do with the sawmill<\/p>\n
business.    It should be remembered that the need is<\/p>\n
projected in such a manner that PW2 is totally unemployed<\/p>\n
without any avocation for life. We do not find any illegality<\/p>\n
or impropriety warranting interference with the above<\/p>\n
RCR.172\/05-D
\n                                   5<\/span><\/p>\n
findings of the Appellate Authority which is to the effect that<\/p>\n
need is not bonafide since PW2 is not conducting sawmill. At<\/p>\n
the same time we are unable to approve the findings of the<\/p>\n
Appellate Authority that the Rent Control Petition is liable to<\/p>\n
be fail because of the availability of building Nos.239 and<\/p>\n
240. As for building No.240 RW1 himself stated that the said<\/p>\n
building is not suitable for his purpose in view of the<\/p>\n
smallness of its size. It is furniture business that is proposed<\/p>\n
to be conducted by PW2. If door No.240 is not suitable for<\/p>\n
the purpose of the tenant who is conducting motor winding<\/p>\n
business, we have no difficulty to accept argument of<\/p>\n
Mr.Sajid that the same cannot be suitable for conducting<\/p>\n
furniture also.   As for door No.239 we notice that RW1<\/p>\n
himself admitted that 6 years prior to Rent Control Petition<\/p>\n
the said building was in occupation of a tenant. Under the<\/p>\n
above circumstances we are not able to approve the findings<\/p>\n
of the first proviso to Section 11(3). We hold that if need is<\/p>\n
bonafide, the RCP is not liable to be dismissed in view of the<\/p>\n
first proviso to Section 11(3).\n<\/p>\n
      4.   As for the finding of the Appellate Authority that<\/p>\n
the tenant is not entitled to protection of the second proviso<\/p>\n
to Section 11(3) we notice that the above finding is only to be<\/p>\n
approved in the light of the Full Bench decision of this court<\/p>\n
RCR.172\/05-D
\n                                 6<\/span><\/p>\n
in Francis v. Sreedevi Varassiar<\/a> (2003 (2) KLT 230<\/p>\n
(F.B) and we approve that finding.\n<\/p>\n
      5.   The result of the above discussions is that the<\/p>\n
Rent Control Revision is liable to be fail. But we notice that<\/p>\n
the rent of Rs.280\/- which is being paid by the respondent to<\/p>\n
the revision petitioner for the petition schedule building<\/p>\n
which is situated in an important locality of Kannur Muncipal<\/p>\n
Town is very low. Having considered the importance of the<\/p>\n
locality we feel that we are inclined to refix the rent at<\/p>\n
Rs.1,000\/- per mensum prospectively with effect from<\/p>\n
1.2.2010. Accordingly we refix the rent. The respondent will<\/p>\n
be liable to pay monthly rent to the revision petitioner at the<\/p>\n
rate of Rs.1,000\/- per mensum with effect from 1.2.2010. We<\/p>\n
make it clear that such refixation is tentative only. It is open<\/p>\n
to both sides to move Rent Control Court for refixation of fair<\/p>\n
rent. Parties are directed to suffer their costs.<\/p>\n
                           PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
\n
                          C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
okb<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court V.C. Yousuff vs K.P.Sameer Kumar on 25 January, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RCRev..No. 172 of 2005() 1. V.C. YOUSUFF, S\/O. AHAMMED KUTTY, … Petitioner Vs 1. K.P.SAMEER KUMAR, S\/O. ACHUTHAN, … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.C.KHALID For Respondent :SRI.N.NAGARESH The Hon’ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE The Hon’ble MR. […]<\/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-260742","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nV.C. Yousuff vs K.P.Sameer Kumar on 25 January, 2010 - 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-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"V.C. Yousuff vs K.P.Sameer Kumar on 25 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-01-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-12-29T03:56:04+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\\\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"V.C. Yousuff vs K.P.Sameer Kumar on 25 January, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-29T03:56:04+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1294,\"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\\\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010\",\"name\":\"V.C. Yousuff vs K.P.Sameer Kumar on 25 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-29T03:56:04+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"V.C. Yousuff vs K.P.Sameer Kumar on 25 January, 2010\"}]},{\"@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.C. Yousuff vs K.P.Sameer Kumar on 25 January, 2010 - 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-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"V.C. Yousuff vs K.P.Sameer Kumar on 25 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-01-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-12-29T03:56:04+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\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"V.C. Yousuff vs K.P.Sameer Kumar on 25 January, 2010","datePublished":"2010-01-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-29T03:56:04+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010"},"wordCount":1294,"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\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010","name":"V.C. Yousuff vs K.P.Sameer Kumar on 25 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-01-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-29T03:56:04+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-c-yousuff-vs-k-p-sameer-kumar-on-25-january-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"V.C. Yousuff vs K.P.Sameer Kumar on 25 January, 2010"}]},{"@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\/260742","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=260742"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/260742\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=260742"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=260742"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=260742"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}