{"id":34370,"date":"2008-08-27T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-26T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008"},"modified":"2016-08-24T12:10:12","modified_gmt":"2016-08-24T06:40:12","slug":"venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"Venkatesh vs Dr Vishnu Madhav Pai on 27 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Venkatesh vs Dr Vishnu Madhav Pai on 27 August, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: B.V.Nagarathna<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT'B.ENC'$i\nAT DHARWAD  j ' ~.   1\n\nDATE!) THIS THE 27TH DAY OF' m;;;%s:{;% 233$' % ' '\n\n \n\nTHE \u00a5~ICiN'BLE MRS. JUSTI(gf3_ xf.'NA{\u00a7.:\u00a7\u00a7AT;\u00ab1N\u00a7{   \"  \n      %\naE'rwEEN:  1' A'\n\n1 VENKATESH   \n3\/0 PRAHLAE) 1{1_::,;<.A.RN:  ' *\n48 YRS,_C)C'-.(_3 s\u00a73v1<:E, _"  \nR\/O NO 2:137,.KACH'ER1_'<3:ALI;1-------~"\nSHAHAPU R\u00bb -'13EVL(_i5__.U'M 4  '\n\n2 %,:smR;%\u00a7*zfAr\u00a7}'1--:;;:%,  ~\n\n S\/O F\u00a7sL{\\HLA\u00a3) KULKARNI\n<..44:YR:~3,' 0:39' aE'R,\\I1\\~::E '\n3153- N0 21'afj2',_ KACHER1 GALLI\nSH-AHAPUR' ._8\u00a7.;1,c;..A.I3Vzv1 4\n\n PETITIONERS\n\nLA ={13:y sV}i\u00a7.\u00a32g'wV s BALIKAI, ADV.)\n QR -visanu MADHAV PM\n~. 5:3 YRS, occ MEDICAL PRACTITIONER\n\n..  R\/O NO 2187, KACHERI GALLE\n SHAHAPUR, BELGAUM 4\n\n RESPONDENT<\/pre>\n
” (By Sr\u00e9: D RAVI KUMAR GOKAKAR, ADV.)<\/p>\n
-2-<\/span><\/p>\n
THIS CRP FILED U\/S :15 CFC. AGA1N$fI”?i*H\u00a7%:;’VT.\u20ac>;2D1:R
\n1t>A’rED:4.12.2oo6 PASSED IN EXECUTION PE”l_”E-TI_O.N”‘?\u00a70.<\/p>\n
31\/1996 ON THE FILE: 0? THE PRLIC\u00a7V{L’ ‘JU1:>GI<:,<\/p>\n
BELGAUM, H\u20ac)LD\u00a7NG SOME QBSERVAT\u00a7QNS.:  '<\/p>\n
This CR? coming on fc)i:__Ali):h.I4iIASSi{}N'.A.{i'z1"this_' \ufb01:2f_y,'  :1<\/p>\n
court delivered fhc following:\n<\/p>\n
%:_I\u00bb;f;y.!_,:1s.__1.=’\u00a2  %<\/p>\n
Though this  for a’cv1v1′:\u00a31:i\u00e9Vsi0:1, with the
\nConsent cf {gained  is heard \ufb01naiiyr
\nZ2.  is filed by the judgment
\ndegiittifs’ \u20ac30  who s\ufb01angely \ufb01led
\n  tirze respondent] decree holder in
\nQ S. 2′   , _<\/p>\n
,, ,,  ~.__V'<S'ir$ij:1geiy, the executing court in an execution petition<\/p>\n
"  "filez\u00e9i; Vjudgment debtor has; viriually grantm\u00e9d ciirectiong<\/p>\n
 \u00e9;-sechtiitc the decree in favour of the decree: holder in the<\/p>\n
AA '  suit. Befzarc proceeding with the facts sf {he casie, it<\/p>\n
 i\u00e9\u00e9ould be relevant to extract the apara\ufb01ve portiszz-11 of the<\/p>\n
order dated 4.12.2606 passtz\u00e9 in E.P.N<:~.3I\/1996 by H<\/p>\n
Addl\ufb01iv\ufb02 Ju\u00e9ge (S3:.D11}, \ufb01elgaum which is as under:<\/p>\n
"ORDER<\/p>\n
1. The Judgment Debtor to disdhee    H<\/p>\n
whether he has paid Rs.2000.33ps~<\/p>\n
decree to the decree Iwldersi “*with.in  I5 <\/p>\n
days from this order.\n<\/p>\n
2. In the event’ that ..  V<\/p>\n
has paid a sum of
\nholder to execute the sdieddeed in-_fdve11r of the
\nJudgment Debtor as  ef the
\nproperty nzenfioibed in ._ decree within the
\nperiod of 15  *\ufb01rerr}\u00a2  date of such
\ndisclosure by  about the
\npayment cf the  degisideratien amount.<\/p>\n
_       V  egxallg
\n duty  other expenses of<\/p>\n
_ dd .  is approved subject’
\ntcrthe  the descriptien of the suit
\n  exactly as mentioned in<\/p>\n
4;’ ” the demee Vof O.S.No.202\/1980, which has been
\n ,_duIy  by the order of ms. Petition
\n .90.\n<\/p>\n
x R  the decree holder do not execute the<\/p>\n
safe deed as provided under the direction at<\/p>\n
, vSI…No.2 the judgment debtor is at liberty to get the<\/p>\n
, ‘sale deed executed by appointing the court
\nvveomrrzxssiewterc<\/p>\n
6. In the event that the judgment debtor
\nfails to eompty his part of the duty as directed by
\nthe decree, his right to get the sale deed executed<\/p>\n
stands frnfeited
\n2″\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
– 4.\n<\/p>\n
T. The 017509 is hereby directed   <\/p>\n
to whether any amount is   ”\n<\/p>\n
judgment debtor in Q.S.No.202\/’I”98fQ
\nE.P.No.11\/1996. :   .;\u00ab  V <\/p>\n
Office to cmnply <\/p>\n
The judgment debtor in    execution
\npetition is referred    in t\ufb01c above order
\nand the deems vhoklor    judgment debtor.
\n  j\ufb01d\u00e9\ufb01ent debtor who has
\n\ufb011ed”oxoe11t\ufb015o\u00a7:_: firefcrmd this civil revision<\/p>\n
Beiiiioii-. {X X’   <\/p>\n
 ~ _T1i\u00e9  facts of this case. are that, on<\/p>\n
 _ V’VL3x..1}\/i\u00a7>7’8.,”_an o\u00e9iooinent to scjzii suit schedule property was<\/p>\n
    between the petitioncm’ late father and the<\/p>\n
A  Since the vendor fa\ufb02cd, to perform his part of<\/p>\n
th’o___A\u00e9>ont:t*act, the purchaser had filed O.S.No.202\/1980<\/p>\n
V’ r _b \u00a7e3:e1dng speci\ufb01c performance of the contract. Even prior to<\/p>\n
that, O.S.No.I18\/19?’? was \ufb01led seeking partzition and
\nseparate possession in the family of vendor by including the
\nst:1i.’\u00a3 schedule property also. Both the, suits were clubbed<\/p>\n
4%<\/p>\n
K<\/p>\n
-5-<\/span><\/p>\n
5. When the matter stood thus, the gyetitionertsizeiejn<\/p>\n
who are the judgment debtors \ufb01led exeeet<\/p>\n
\u00a7’:io:1.  ‘ ;\n<\/p>\n
No.31]1996 against the responc3;eii’t;’–d.ecree  <\/p>\n
his anest and cietaention in civil   :ib:”a\u00a7t\u00a7;eh:1ixeiite_ef<\/p>\n
the movables beiongjixxg teeiihe  <\/p>\n
o.s.No.2e2\/1980 dated 2\u20acf>?1v1_,19u85.”ee_:v’ariiended in<\/p>\n
Mis.No.88[199O dated V1711′; ,   <\/p>\n
6. Our.  Vthe.Vreej;aei;itient appeared and filed
\nhis    that the application
\n\ufb01le<fi'~~by'*  was misconceived and that<\/p>\n
the j11dg3\u00a7Ii(3\u00a3ltVVV'!;it;.':'|;'V!'tO\u00a3f not have \ufb01led the execution<\/p>\n
  recording evidence on both sides, the<\/p>\n
.   disposed of the execution peti\ufb01on by order<\/p>\n
 2  the operative portion of which is extracted<\/p>\n
'h\u00e9ibove;  sum and substance of which is that directions<\/p>\n
V * : y'vere"i.ssued to execute the decree for speci\ufb01c performance in<\/p>\n
V  faivour of the respondent herein. It is this order, which has<\/p>\n
been challenged in the instant civil revision petition.<\/p>\n
-7-<\/span><\/p>\n
7. I have heexd Sri.Ravi S. , iearned ‘the<\/p>\n
peti\ufb01oners and Sri\ufb02avikumar Gokalcar,   <\/p>\n
the Iespoadezut.   ‘<\/p>\n
3. It is contended on beegte pf tee,ee\ufb01eo:g\u00a7rg_’ehat ‘ant *<\/p>\n
execution pe\ufb01tion \ufb01led by a_it:1d:gxe.ent  the decree
\ncannot be executed   tliheizieetholder and that the
\ndineetions issuer}. in tlge–  e\ufb01ect an order
\nthat     that Wouid have
\nbeen    a petition \ufb01led by the
\njudgritent  dig-eetteions could not have been
\nissuedA’hy4t}1e  He fairly concedes that if there<\/p>\n
waeeny stibeeqtuentttiegexl dispute between the parties, then<\/p>\n
.  ” \u00a2itV.WesE”-fer the  hezein when are judgment eiebtors to<\/p>\n
  Vtthatie  action in an appropriate forum and in an<\/p>\n
ap;\u00a7mpsiete.- Aftnanner and not by \ufb01\ufb01ng execution petzi\ufb01on<\/p>\n
 bein’g.Vt__}\u00a7te judgment debtors. He therefore, submits that the<\/p>\n
 eexettu\ufb01on petition itself was not majntainable. Therefore,<\/p>\n
‘  the execution court ought to have dismissed in limine the<\/p>\n
%\/<\/p>\n
-3-<\/span><\/p>\n
petition instead of gantixlg directions in favour of ‘decree<\/p>\n
holder.\n<\/p>\n
9. Per contra, it is submitted Zen of  1eVs};\u00a7ef1giei1t it<\/p>\n
herein that being the decIee_ho1(ter,:”he <\/p>\n
the dinections of the
\nRs.2000.33ps which  of
\njustice demanded   be directed ot
\nexecute   the execution court
\nwas theraefet:;’*– petitioners herein to<\/p>\n
comply with the  as he had the right<\/p>\n
to execute and get the’. deed in accordance<\/p>\n
with  the’_\u00a7_1eeree  performaxace. He further<\/p>\n
subaeits ef \ufb01x\ufb01xedum cannot be vieww in a hyper-
\n:technicaA1t”‘;}3a3;:ierV’:’st\u00a7  defeat justice and he hence<\/p>\n
suasinits that\ufb02xe qiviife\ufb01ision petition be dismissed.<\/p>\n
 ‘T11\u00abe–..tp43it.$;ts that arise for my consideration in this<\/p>\n
  V jiwevisibiz petition are as follows:<\/p>\n
%<\/p>\n
 ‘   They are also emitted for 3\/4″‘ share<\/p>\n
\u00ab-9..\n<\/p>\n
‘I. Whether the execution petition could
\nhave been maintained by the judgment debtqr
\n(petitioners) in O.S.No.202\/1980 seeking
\nprayers made in the execution petition?  <\/p>\n
2. if the answer to point No.1  ink
\ncyf\ufb01mzative, whether the execution oobzgjt ‘ecrz;I4::’. T’
\nhave issued directions to execute  “\u00a2:te_c3reew in .v
\nfaveur czf the decree hriitder” ‘(reeperedeitti _i’n;”\n<\/p>\n
O.S.No.202\/I980?'     * \"  \n\n11. I have perused    \n<\/pre>\n
26.11.1985 passed  O_,_S.Ne.i\u00abi1fi\/1$579 and
\nO.S.No.202\/1980.   of the judgment<\/p>\n
reads as follows:   .  V<\/p>\n
A_ < ' "{}..S.";"!{'e;e!41'8',\/.?S?'?9 is partly decreed. It is
\ntZeetc1rea';._tfu:1t' the–._p?ciir\u00a2t1jfs are entitled for 3\/49*
\nsluzrje, -each: 1',f4'*\u00a5..Sfu1re in the suit house subject<\/p>\n
' ~ to the ~.decree fer spec-a\ufb01c perfonnanoe ef oontract
\n V in O. 8. 1516.292]! 980 in favour of defendant No.2.<\/p>\n
"It i\u00e9 \ufb01uther declared the piaintz\ufb01is are entitled for<\/p>\n
3,1*tF?*"'ehare in the aompensatzen amount of the<\/p>\n
in"."the:=m9vabIe properties as shown in Schedufe
\nT64'? k;)fth;e pfaint. The rent cf the suit is dismissed.
\n _ V The suit of the defendant No.2 in
\n" S.No.202\/I986' is partly decreed Defendant
\n\ufb01fe. 1-Prahiad Hcmamanth Kulicarni as Manager of
\nthe family is ordered to execute the safe deed in
\nrespect of the tencmted portion of defendant No.2
\nout of the suit house. The other defendants to
\njoin him. Defendant No.2 Dr. Vishnu Pat is
\nordered-ta pay to defendant No. I or to deposit in
\nthe court the remaining bafanm of consideration<\/p>\n
\/\ufb01g<\/p>\n
~10-\n<\/p>\n
ammmt (If Rs.2G00.33ps within three moz{;ih_s’e._
\nfrom the date of this judgment and decree. ‘jAfie”i*;_ .\u00a2
\nsuch deposit of the balcmoe c:onsi\u00a21erc:tie.z\u00a7 ” ;_.
\namozmt, defendant No.1 as manager offthev joiizf
\nfamily is ordered to execute the saIe.dlee\u00a7:\u00a5.wi’ifzin
\nthree months from the date:  pqyfne’n:t’o1._’f_  ,
\ndeposit of balance eonsid’erationj a’.meunt,_ ‘and  f
\nother defendants tejoin h1″rr:,”=\u00aboihe\ufb01Lvis\u00e9’defendani’\u00ab._
\nNo.2 Dr. Vishnu Par’ :3 eniitledfao gei ihesalevd\u00e9ed .
\nexecuted through the
\nrest of the suit of deferiiigiri No.2 ~Dr’;”\u00a3~’:’shriz; Pm”
\n(PIa:’n11_”\ufb01F in (1.3; ;aro;2;a2\/ 1930;  in
\no.3.1vo.2o2\/ 1 980-~ 1′; dxgnzgssm, ‘ ” – .. e<\/p>\n
As per fhe  cases, I
\nleave z}’w’par1iee'”zTo  {heir  in both<\/p>\n
the stgeii$~;\u00ab\u00ab,,V _7A mpg, of this” be kept in
\nOusf\ufb02z-o’\u00bb:–:QG;%?W’$98Dr’$    g V<\/p>\n
12.    \ufb01nder makes it apparently clear
\nthat  for ‘\ufb02eas dccntcd subject to the decree<\/p>\n
fq1f.; s”p-zrzci\ufb01e pe\ufb01\u00e9\ufb01aence of contract in the suit \ufb01led by<\/p>\n
  It is not in dispute thai the respondent<\/p>\n
I    the amount in terms of the said decree<\/p>\n
e\ufb02d  \ufb01led E.P.No.11\/1996 for execution of the<\/p>\n
 .. ‘i_f’\u00b01’.iet2…: But the same was dismissed on 4.9.1999 for non-<\/p>\n
 –..VV’p3*(1.r.AS\u00a3:c11tion. Subsequently, 110 steps were  for<\/p>\n
iexecu\ufb01on of the decree for speci\ufb01c performance by the<\/p>\n
mspondent. In the meanwhile, the petitioners herein \ufb01led<\/p>\n
– 11-\n<\/p>\n
execution petition No.31\/1996 seeking arrest and detention
\nof the mspondent hemin. Without there being V.<\/p>\n
which was recognized in the \u00a2:ie<:1ee__   'it;<\/p>\n
\u20ac}.S.No.202\/ 1980 the executimn  <\/p>\n
dismissed the said execution pet1\ufb010n_,esjj.\ufb01et  {:31 '*<\/p>\n
two counts. Firstly, because Whefdno deczeeeisfas Idade <\/p>\n
favour of the petitioners  and   su\ufb01ezed a
\ndecree for speci\ufb01c  was H\ufb01ouxquestion of
\nmaintain' 19' g an execu\ufb01o\ufb01' 'db  such a<\/p>\n
circuz11stan<;es;~:  if  any subsequent<\/p>\n
devev}op;11eiii3'v ,3 1=;:;ga:_' dispute arose in respect of the suit
\n  debtors] petitioners herein<\/p>\n
oujghtx to d\u00e9haffe  appropriate legal proceedings for<\/p>\n
   \u00e9n'\u00a5.'1_'1:i1dieaiiic3\u00a2I&1 of said dispute instead of \ufb01ijng of<\/p>\n
I3. V-._'HG'sz\u00e9"ever; the execu\ufb01ng court did mat simply dismiss<\/p>\n
 .. ts: execution petition on the gnund of maintainability.<\/p>\n
dd  insfeaci evidence was zmorded on the yrayezs made by the<\/p>\n
 peti\ufb01oners herein and directions were issued vzixtually<\/p>\n
%<\/p>\n
 of<\/p>\n
.. 13-\n<\/p>\n
14. Learned counsel for the respondent <\/p>\n
that it is the duty ef the court to render  iaeviog <\/p>\n
a hyper-technical approach. No <;ioe4lj3'tj,_   V":i"]:1e  L<\/p>\n
court to render justice  v\u00a77hene*;e'fV.t11ere\u00bb'.ir::.  -:iee:ie'n*d for
\njustice, it is the duty of the   eee
\nthe four corners ofvIeixv_,  gune\u00e9aeo\ufb01 and justice
\ncan be rendered. ':i\u00e9\u00a7 :'xe1;p1b\u00a7ip:'ays to be rendered
\nin     3. case Where an
\nexeeutie-.1:1'V     by the judgment debtor
\nwhijieffis  a decree for speci\ufb01c
\n  favour of the decree holder who<\/p>\n
has in' faet"1oei:._ srig\u00a71t to execute the decree. This is an<\/p>\n
< of not only pxoeeduxe but also reversal of<\/p>\n
'  " j\ufb02\ufb01ispmxdenoe in the matter of execution of a decree.<\/p>\n
.' .  T'\u00a71evex*e1eVAofjus\ufb01ee cannot be extended beyond the law and<\/p>\n
juxieprizdence since eou\ufb02e have the duty to render justice in<\/p>\n
AA '[ accordance with law.\n<\/p>\n
%<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Venkatesh vs Dr Vishnu Madhav Pai on 27 August, 2008 Author: B.V.Nagarathna IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT’B.ENC’$i AT DHARWAD j ‘ ~. 1 DATE!) THIS THE 27TH DAY OF’ m;;;%s:{;% 233$’ % ‘ ‘ THE \u00a5~ICiN’BLE MRS. JUSTI(gf3_ xf.’NA{\u00a7.:\u00a7\u00a7AT;\u00ab1N\u00a7{ ” % aE’rwEEN: 1′ A’ 1 VENKATESH 3\/0 PRAHLAE) 1{1_::,;<.A.RN: ' […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-34370","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nVenkatesh vs Dr Vishnu Madhav Pai on 27 August, 2008 - 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\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Venkatesh vs Dr Vishnu Madhav Pai on 27 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-08-26T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-08-24T06:40:12+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Venkatesh vs Dr Vishnu Madhav Pai on 27 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-24T06:40:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1793,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008\",\"name\":\"Venkatesh vs Dr Vishnu Madhav Pai on 27 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-24T06:40:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Venkatesh vs Dr Vishnu Madhav Pai on 27 August, 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":"Venkatesh vs Dr Vishnu Madhav Pai on 27 August, 2008 - 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\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Venkatesh vs Dr Vishnu Madhav Pai on 27 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-26T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-08-24T06:40:12+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Venkatesh vs Dr Vishnu Madhav Pai on 27 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-24T06:40:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008"},"wordCount":1793,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008","name":"Venkatesh vs Dr Vishnu Madhav Pai on 27 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-24T06:40:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venkatesh-vs-dr-vishnu-madhav-pai-on-27-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Venkatesh vs Dr Vishnu Madhav Pai on 27 August, 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\/34370","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=34370"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/34370\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=34370"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=34370"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=34370"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}