{"id":263171,"date":"2010-07-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-07-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010"},"modified":"2018-12-25T14:17:24","modified_gmt":"2018-12-25T08:47:24","slug":"bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010","title":{"rendered":"Bobby Kuruvila vs Vijayanand on 29 July, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Bobby Kuruvila vs Vijayanand on 29 July, 2010<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCon.Case(C).No. 592 of 2010(S)\n\n\n1. BOBBY KURUVILA, AGED 42 YEARS,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. VIJAYANAND, AGED 54 YEARS,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. V.N.SASIDHARAN, AGED 55 YEARS,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.MANOJ\n\n                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT\n\n Dated :29\/07\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                             R.BASANT, J\n                      ------------------------------------\n                     C.C.C No.592 of 2010 in\n                    W.P(C) No.36179 of 2005\n                     -------------------------------------\n               Dated this the 29th day of July, 2010\n\n                                O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">      The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition to<\/p>\n<p>initiate proceedings in contempt against the respondents herein,<\/p>\n<p>who, it is alleged, have wilfully not complied with the judgment<\/p>\n<p>dated 27.11.2006 in W.P(C) No.36179 of 2005.<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">      2.   W.P(C) No.36179 of 2005 was a writ a petition filed by<\/p>\n<p>the petitioner herein alleging that a complaint against the 5th<\/p>\n<p>respondent, a senior police official of the Indian Police Service,<\/p>\n<p>which respondent Nos.2 and 3 were duty bound to enquire and<\/p>\n<p>investigate, was not being properly dealt with by them.<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">      3.   When that petition came up for hearing on<\/p>\n<p>27.01.2010, the learned Government Pleader submitted that<\/p>\n<p>after completing the enquiry, factual report shall be filed within<\/p>\n<p>a period of 6 months.         Accepting that submission, the said<\/p>\n<p>proceedings were closed.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">      4.   This contempt of court case has been filed by the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner on 21.05.2010 to complain that notwithstanding the<\/p>\n<p>C.C.C No.592 of 2010 in<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">W.P(C) No.36179 of 2005           2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>elapse of more than three years, the directions in the said<\/p>\n<p>judgment have not been complied with.            According to the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner, &#8220;factual report&#8221;, which the Vigilance Police is<\/p>\n<p>supposed to submit after completion of investigation before the<\/p>\n<p>court, has not been filed so far.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">      5.    Notice was ordered to respondent Nos.1 and 2. They<\/p>\n<p>occupy the office shown as respondent Nos.3 and 4 in the Writ<\/p>\n<p>Petition. Respondent No.1 has filed a detailed affidavit. In such<\/p>\n<p>affidavit, the 1st respondent submits that there has been no wilful<\/p>\n<p>disobedience of the directions in the judgment in W.P(C)<\/p>\n<p>No.361795 of 2005 (Annexure-A2 hereinafter) either by the two<\/p>\n<p>respondents herein or their predecessors in office.<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">      6.    The affidavit filed by the 1st respondent shows that to<\/p>\n<p>expedite action and to strictly comply with the directions in<\/p>\n<p>Annex.A2 judgment, the responsibility of enquiry into the<\/p>\n<p>complaints raised against the 5th respondent in Annex.A2 was<\/p>\n<p>entrusted with two different officials.         The allegation of<\/p>\n<p>disproportionate amassment of wealth was assigned to a Deputy<\/p>\n<p>Inspector General, whereas the other allegations were ordered<\/p>\n<p>to be enquired into by the 4th respondent.          Both of them<\/p>\n<p>C.C.C No.592 of 2010 in<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">W.P(C) No.36179 of 2005          3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>submitted their reports in due time, ie. before the expiry of a<\/p>\n<p>period of six months from Annex.A2 judgment. A report was<\/p>\n<p>submitted to the Director of Vigilance about the outcome of such<\/p>\n<p>enquiry by the said two police officials. In respect of the enquiry<\/p>\n<p>into disproportionate amassment of wealth, the allegations were<\/p>\n<p>found to be true and correct. Consequently a crime has now<\/p>\n<p>been   registered   as  Crime     No.VC3\/2001\/SCE       under    the<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"\/doc\/1331755\/\" id=\"a_1\">Prevention of Corruption Act<\/a>.        The matter is now being<\/p>\n<p>investigated by the Vigilance Police. The learned Government<\/p>\n<p>Pleader submits that the investigation is in progress and in the<\/p>\n<p>very nature of the allegations, some further time will be required<\/p>\n<p>to complete the investigation. The learned Government Pleader<\/p>\n<p>undertakes that the officers presently in charge shall do the<\/p>\n<p>needful and ensure that a final report is filed before court in that<\/p>\n<p>crime as expeditiously as possible.      The learned Government<\/p>\n<p>Pleader submits that no time limit may be prescribed for the<\/p>\n<p>completion of investigation as in the very nature of the<\/p>\n<p>allegations, further time will be required and it will be<\/p>\n<p>impossible now to undertake that the final report shall be filed<\/p>\n<p>within any prescribed period of time. Any such directions may<\/p>\n<p>C.C.C No.592 of 2010 in<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_2\">W.P(C) No.36179 of 2005          4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>indirectly enure to the benefit of the accused and, in these<\/p>\n<p>circumstances, the discretion of the Investigating Officer may<\/p>\n<p>not be fettered by issuing any specific directions, submits the<\/p>\n<p>learned Government Pleader.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">      7.   So far as the other part of the allegations which were<\/p>\n<p>enquired into by the Superintendent of Police is concerned, it is<\/p>\n<p>reported that the Superintendent of Police in his enquiry was<\/p>\n<p>satisfied that the 5th respondent in Annex.A2 was contumaciously<\/p>\n<p>responsible for certain acts.      These acts, according to the<\/p>\n<p>Vigilance Police, did not warrant registration of a crime. The<\/p>\n<p>Superintendent of Police, who conducted the enquiry was of the<\/p>\n<p>opinion that departmental action will have to be pursued.<\/p>\n<p>Incorporating that recommendation, report was submitted to the<\/p>\n<p>Director of Vigilance and the Director of Vigilance is seized off<\/p>\n<p>the matter.      Appropriate orders are expected from the<\/p>\n<p>Government      and,    in  these  circumstances,    the  learned<\/p>\n<p>Government Pleader on behalf of the respondents undertakes<\/p>\n<p>that the needful shall be done by the Director of Vigilance and<\/p>\n<p>the Government shortly.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">C.C.C No.592 of 2010 in<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_3\">W.P(C) No.36179 of 2005          5<\/span><\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">      8.    The learned Government Pleader submits that, in<\/p>\n<p>these circumstances, there is no question of any wilful<\/p>\n<p>disobedience or contempt having been committed by respondent<\/p>\n<p>Nos.3 and 4 in the Writ Petition or the incumbents in office from<\/p>\n<p>time to time. In these circumstances, no further action may be<\/p>\n<p>pursued in this contempt of court case against respondent Nos.1<\/p>\n<p>and 2 herein, submits the learned Government Pleader.<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_9\">      9.    The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that<\/p>\n<p>the undertaking in Annex.A2 order was that &#8220;factual report&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>shall be filed. According to the petitioner, submission of a report<\/p>\n<p>after the enquiry then pending is not sufficient. In order to<\/p>\n<p>comply with the undertaking given by the learned Government<\/p>\n<p>Pleader in Annex.A2, the final report after investigation must<\/p>\n<p>have been filed.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_10\">      10. I am afraid, this contention cannot be accepted. The<\/p>\n<p>expression &#8220;factual report&#8221; was not evidently employed in<\/p>\n<p>Annex.A2     judgment in any technical sense. An enquiry was<\/p>\n<p>pending and what this Court expected was that such enquiry<\/p>\n<p>must be completed and report submitted to appropriate<\/p>\n<p>authorities.   Evidently the enquiry officer\/officers can submit<\/p>\n<p>C.C.C No.592 of 2010 in<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_4\">W.P(C) No.36179 of 2005          6<\/span><\/p>\n<p>their report only before the Director of Vigilance, which they<\/p>\n<p>have already submitted and, in these circumstances, I am of the<\/p>\n<p>opinion that the respondents herein cannot be held to be guilty<\/p>\n<p>of any wilful contempt.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_11\">      11. I may hasten to observe that I take note of the plight<\/p>\n<p>of the petitioner. He had come to this Court in 2005 demanding<\/p>\n<p>proper enquiry and action into a complaint filed against the 5th<\/p>\n<p>respondent. Even today, though, as I have already noted, there<\/p>\n<p>is no wilful contempt, no effective final action has been taken in<\/p>\n<p>his complaint. I need only express that it is incumbent on the<\/p>\n<p>officials concerned to ensure that the investigation into the<\/p>\n<p>crime registered is completed as expeditiously as possible.<\/p>\n<p>Departmental action on the other allegations must also be taken<\/p>\n<p>to bring the proceedings to its logical conclusions.   Such action<\/p>\n<p>is necessary to restore the faith of individuals like the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>in the rule of law.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_12\">      12. In these circumstances, with the observation that I<\/p>\n<p>expect that the investigation in Crime No.VC3\/2001\/SCE of<\/p>\n<p>Vigilance of Police shall be completed and final report shall be<\/p>\n<p>filed before court and expecting that appropriate decision on the<\/p>\n<p>C.C.C No.592 of 2010 in<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_5\">W.P(C) No.36179 of 2005        7<\/span><\/p>\n<p>question of departmental action against the 5th respondent shall<\/p>\n<p>be taken by the authorities concerned as expeditiously as<\/p>\n<p>possible and making it clear that the option of the petitioner to<\/p>\n<p>approach this Court afresh if appropriate action is not taken on<\/p>\n<p>the above subjects with expedition, this Contempt of Court Case<\/p>\n<p>is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_13\">\n<p id=\"p_14\">                                          (R.BASANT, JUDGE)<br \/>\nrtr\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Bobby Kuruvila vs Vijayanand on 29 July, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Con.Case(C).No. 592 of 2010(S) 1. BOBBY KURUVILA, AGED 42 YEARS, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. VIJAYANAND, AGED 54 YEARS, &#8230; Respondent 2. V.N.SASIDHARAN, AGED 55 YEARS, For Petitioner :SRI.R.MANOJ For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER The Hon&#8217;ble MR. Justice [&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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-263171","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Bobby Kuruvila vs Vijayanand on 29 July, 2010 - 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\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bobby Kuruvila vs Vijayanand on 29 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-07-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-12-25T08:47:24+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\\\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bobby Kuruvila vs Vijayanand on 29 July, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-25T08:47:24+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1212,\"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\\\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010\",\"name\":\"Bobby Kuruvila vs Vijayanand on 29 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-25T08:47:24+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bobby Kuruvila vs Vijayanand on 29 July, 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":"Bobby Kuruvila vs Vijayanand on 29 July, 2010 - 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\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bobby Kuruvila vs Vijayanand on 29 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-07-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-12-25T08:47:24+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\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bobby Kuruvila vs Vijayanand on 29 July, 2010","datePublished":"2010-07-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-25T08:47:24+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010"},"wordCount":1212,"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\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010","name":"Bobby Kuruvila vs Vijayanand on 29 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-07-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-25T08:47:24+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bobby-kuruvila-vs-vijayanand-on-29-july-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bobby Kuruvila vs Vijayanand on 29 July, 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\/263171","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=263171"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/263171\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=263171"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=263171"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=263171"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}