{"id":29153,"date":"2002-08-27T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-08-26T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002"},"modified":"2014-09-18T18:03:41","modified_gmt":"2014-09-18T12:33:41","slug":"r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002","title":{"rendered":"R. Chinnadurai Padayachi vs R. Kasinathan on 27 August, 2002"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">R. Chinnadurai Padayachi vs R. Kasinathan on 27 August, 2002<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED: 27\/08\/2002\n\nCORAM\n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. KULASEKARAN\n\nW.P. No. 14182 of 1995\nand\nW.M.P. No. 27512 of 2000\n\nR. Chinnadurai Padayachi                       ... Petitioner\n\n-Vs-\n\n1. R. Kasinathan\n2. L. Chinnappa Padayachi\n3. C. Thangarasu Padayachi\n\n4. The Additional Records Officer\n    &amp; the Additional Tahsildar\n   Kumbakonam Taluk\n   Thanjavur District\n\n5. The Special Deputy Collector\n   Revenue Court (Special Deputy Collector)\n   Kumbakonam Taluk\n   Thanjavur District\n\n6. The District Revenue Officer\n   Thanjavur District\n   Thanjavur                                    ... Respondents\n\n\n        Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for  a\nWrit of Certiorarified Mandamus as stated therein.\n\nFor Petitioner :       Mr.  T.P.  Kathiravan\n\nFor Respondent :       Mr.  T.  Susindran for R1\n                        Mr.  M.  Mahalingam, Government\n                        Advocate for R4 to R6\n                        No appearance for R2 and R3\n\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>        The  petitioner  has  filed  the  above petition seeking for a Writ of<br \/>\nCertiorarified Mandamus to call for the  records  from  the  4th  respondent&#8217;s<br \/>\nproceedings in R.T.R.    No.    112  of  1983  dated 31-08-1983 and subsequent<br \/>\nproceedings in R.T.R.  No.   34\/91,  dated  28-06-1993  and  5th  respondent&#8217;s<br \/>\nproceedings in R.T.R.   Appeal  P.    No.    6\/93  dated  19-01-1994  and  6th<br \/>\nrespondent&#8217;s proceedings in R.T.R.R.P.  No.  4 of 1994, I-3 dated 2  4-10-1994<br \/>\nand  quash  the same and direct the 4th respondent to dispose of the matter on<br \/>\nmerits by giving opportunity to the petitioner  to  examine  the  petitioner&#8217;s<br \/>\nwitnesses in conformity with the principles of natural justice.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.      Heard both  sides.    The petitioner and 3rd respondent herein<br \/>\nhave entered into a sale agreement in respect of agricultural lands  measuring<br \/>\n10 cents  in  RS  No.    35\/2  out  of 31 cents at No.88, Kothangudi Thattimal<br \/>\nVillage on 04-06-1984 for a sum of Rs.3,625\/-.   The  3rd  respondent,  though<br \/>\nreceived  a  sum  of  Rs.1,000\/- as advance under the said agreement failed to<br \/>\nexecute the sale deed, with the result the petitioner filed suit in O.S.   No.<br \/>\n6  of 1985 for specific performance of the contract and the said suit was also<br \/>\ndecreed by the trial court.  The trial court itself executed a sale deed dated<br \/>\n06-03-1991 which was registered as document No.121 of 1991 with Sub-registrar,<br \/>\nSwamimalai.  The petitioner has filed E.P.  No.  98 of 1991  for  recovery  of<br \/>\npossession  and  possession was also handed over on 13-04-1991 in the presence<br \/>\nof Village Administrative Officer and others.  Thereafter, the 1st  respondent<br \/>\nallegedly  interfered  with the possession of the plaintiff, hence a complaint<br \/>\ndated 02-05-1991 was filed by him with the local police.  The  1st  respondent<br \/>\nhas also filed another suit in O.S.  No.  5 of 1991 to restrain the petitioner<br \/>\nfrom  interfering  into  his possession on the ground that he is a cultivating<br \/>\ntenant under the 3rd respondent herein.    It  is  also  alleged  by  the  1st<br \/>\nrespondent  that  the  2nd  respondent  has executed a tenancy agreement dated<br \/>\n23-06-1983, which agreement was also recorded by the 4th respondent in  R.T.R.<br \/>\nNo.  112  of  198  3  dated  30-01-1983.    The  petitioner  has also filed an<br \/>\napplication before the 4th respondent in T.R.R.P.  No.  34 of 1991  to  cancel<br \/>\nthe earlier proceedings against the 1st respondent.  The petitioner herein has<br \/>\ncanvassed  before  the 4th respondent that the property originally belonged to<br \/>\none Lakshmana Padayachi, later under a partition  deed  dated  29-06-1993  the<br \/>\nsame was  allotted  to  the  2nd  respondent  herein.   Subsequently, the said<br \/>\nproperty was partitioned between the 2nd respondent with his two  sons  namely<br \/>\nRajaram and  Thangaraj, 3rd respondent herein and allotted 10 cents each.  The<br \/>\n2nd respondent sold his  share  in  Survey  No.35\/2  along  with  another  son<br \/>\nmeasuring about  20  cents to the 1st respondent&#8217;s wife.  The portion allotted<br \/>\nto the 3rd respondent to the extent of 10 cents was purchased  in  the  manner<br \/>\nmentioned  above  and  sale  deed  executed  by  the court and possession also<br \/>\ndelivered to him.  According  to  the  petitioner,  the  respondents  1  to  4<br \/>\ncolluded with each  other with the result R.T.R.  No.  112 of 1993 was ordered<br \/>\nagainst him.  The petitioner came to know the R.T.R.  Proceedings  only  after<br \/>\nreceipt of the  pleadings  in  O.S.  No.5 of 1991.  It is also the case of the<br \/>\npetitioner that &#8220;adangal&#8221; in the fasli 1393 and 1395 do not contain  the  name<br \/>\nof 1st  respondent  as  cultivating tenant.  The 4th respondent has passed the<br \/>\nimpugned order dated 28-06-1993 in R.T.R.  No.   112  of  1983  rejecting  the<br \/>\npetitioner&#8217;s contention.    The  2nd  and  3rd  respondents  do not oppose the<br \/>\npetitioner&#8217;s contention.\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.      According  to  the  petitioner,   the   5th   respondent\/first<br \/>\nappellate  authority mechanically confirmed the findings of the 4th respondent<br \/>\nand dismissed the appeal on 19-01-1994.  The 5th  respondent  also  failed  to<br \/>\nconsider the decree  passed  in  O.S.  No.  6 of 1985 and order passed in E.P.<br \/>\nNo.  98 of 1991 in O.S.    No.    6  of  1985  dated  13-04-1991  thereby  the<br \/>\npossession was delivered to the petitioner.  Against the order of<br \/>\nthe  5th respondent, the petitioner herein has filed a revision petition under<br \/>\nSection 7 of the Act before the 6th respondent in R.T.R.R.P.  No.  4  of  1994<br \/>\nand the 6th respondent also dismissed the revision.\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.      The   learned  counsel  appearing  for  the  first  respondent<br \/>\nsubmitted that nevertheless change of ownership the fact remains that the  1st<br \/>\nrespondent herein is a cultivating tenant which was duly registered as per the<br \/>\nAct  by  the  4th  respondent  which  was  also  confirmed by the 5 th and 6th<br \/>\nrespondents, hence prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.      Admittedly, in this case, the record of tenancy was registered<br \/>\nin the name of the first respondent herein as early as 1983.   The  petitioner<br \/>\nherein  has  become owner of the property consequent to the sale deed executed<br \/>\nby the Civil Court on 06-03-1991.  It is also not disputed by the  respondents<br \/>\nthat  possession  was  delivered  as  per  the  order  passed in the execution<br \/>\npetition on 13-04-1991.  The authorities, after taking into  account  of  kist<br \/>\nreceipts,  land  rent receipts, records produced by the 1st respondent to show<br \/>\nthat he is a small farmer found that 1st respondent is a  cultivating  tenant.<br \/>\nIt  is also rightly pointed out by the authorities that the 1st respondent was<br \/>\nin possession of the property as a cultivating tenant even prior to  the  sale<br \/>\nagreement  dated  04-06-1984  entered into between the petitioner and the 3 rd<br \/>\nrespondent herein.  Though ownership has been  changed  in  the  name  of  the<br \/>\npetitioner,  the  land  has  been under the cultivation of the 1 st respondent<br \/>\never since 1983, the date in which his  name  was  registered  as  cultivating<br \/>\ntenant i.e., 31-08-1983.\n<\/p>\n<p>        6.      As rightly pointed out by the authorities, change of ownership<br \/>\ncannot  affect registration of land records of tenancy rights in favour of the<br \/>\n1st respondent.  Moreover, no documents were produced by the petitioner before<br \/>\nthe authorities to show  that  he  has  cultivated  the  lands.    No  details<br \/>\nfurnished by both  sides  in  respect of suit in O.S.  No.  5 of 1991 filed by<br \/>\nthe 1st respondent herein against the petitioner.  However, the petitioner has<br \/>\nproduced a xerox copy of the judgment  in  O.S.    No.    370  of  1991  dated<br \/>\n29-10-1999  passed by the Additional District Munsif, Kumbakonam and submitted<br \/>\nthat the said court dismissed  the  suit  for  injunction  filed  by  the  1st<br \/>\nrespondent  in  respect  of the very same land, which is the subject matter of<br \/>\nthis writ petition,  which  is  not  disputed  by  the  respondents  1  to  3.<br \/>\nAdmittedly,  the  said  suit was decreed long after the order dated 24-10-1994<br \/>\npassed by the 6th respondent herein.  Subsequent  events,  if  any  alter  the<br \/>\nrights  of  the parties, it is always open to them to approach the authorities<br \/>\nto seek their remedy.  The orders passed by the authorities are based on valid<br \/>\nevidence and  on  independent  consideration.    Hence,  no  interference   is<br \/>\nwarranted.\n<\/p>\n<p>        With the above observation, the writ petition is dismissed.  NO costs.<br \/>\nConnected WMP is also closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>27-08-2002<br \/>\nrsh<br \/>\nIndex :  Yes<br \/>\nInternet :  Yes<\/p>\n<p>To\n<\/p>\n<p>1.  The Additional Records Officer<br \/>\n&amp; the Additional Tahsildar<br \/>\nKumbakonam Taluk<br \/>\nThanjavur District<\/p>\n<p>2.  The Special Deputy Collector<br \/>\nRevenue Court (Special Deputy Collector)<br \/>\nKumbakonam Taluk<br \/>\nThanjavur District<\/p>\n<p>3.  The District Revenue Officer<br \/>\nThanjavur District<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court R. Chinnadurai Padayachi vs R. Kasinathan on 27 August, 2002 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27\/08\/2002 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. KULASEKARAN W.P. No. 14182 of 1995 and W.M.P. No. 27512 of 2000 R. Chinnadurai Padayachi &#8230; Petitioner -Vs- 1. R. Kasinathan 2. L. Chinnappa Padayachi 3. [&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-29153","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 v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>R. Chinnadurai Padayachi vs R. Kasinathan on 27 August, 2002 - 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\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"R. Chinnadurai Padayachi vs R. Kasinathan on 27 August, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002\" \/>\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=\"2002-08-26T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-09-18T12:33:41+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\\\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"R. Chinnadurai Padayachi vs R. Kasinathan on 27 August, 2002\",\"datePublished\":\"2002-08-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-09-18T12:33:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002\"},\"wordCount\":1214,\"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\\\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002\",\"name\":\"R. Chinnadurai Padayachi vs R. Kasinathan on 27 August, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2002-08-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-09-18T12:33:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"R. Chinnadurai Padayachi vs R. Kasinathan on 27 August, 2002\"}]},{\"@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":"R. Chinnadurai Padayachi vs R. Kasinathan on 27 August, 2002 - 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\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"R. Chinnadurai Padayachi vs R. Kasinathan on 27 August, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2002-08-26T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-09-18T12:33:41+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\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"R. Chinnadurai Padayachi vs R. Kasinathan on 27 August, 2002","datePublished":"2002-08-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-09-18T12:33:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002"},"wordCount":1214,"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\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002","name":"R. Chinnadurai Padayachi vs R. Kasinathan on 27 August, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2002-08-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-09-18T12:33:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-chinnadurai-padayachi-vs-r-kasinathan-on-27-august-2002#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"R. Chinnadurai Padayachi vs R. Kasinathan on 27 August, 2002"}]},{"@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\/29153","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=29153"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29153\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29153"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29153"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29153"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}