{"id":36979,"date":"2010-04-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010"},"modified":"2017-03-18T22:16:17","modified_gmt":"2017-03-18T16:46:17","slug":"andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010","title":{"rendered":"Andalammal vs The Principal Secretary To &#8230; on 8 April, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Andalammal vs The Principal Secretary To &#8230; on 8 April, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED:  8\/4\/2010\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.RAMANATHAN\n\nW.P.(MD)No.10259 of 2009\nand\nM.P.(MD)No.3 of 2008\n\n1. Andalammal\n\n2. Ramakrishnammal\n\n3. S.K.Ramasamy\n\n4. Seethalakshmi\n\n5. Jayalakshmi\n\n6. Jayabharathi\n\n7. S.K.Kannan\n\n8. Geetha           ...\t       Petitioners\n\nVs.\n\n1. The Principal Secretary to Government,\n   Home (Police-XIX) Department,\n   Government of Tamil Nadu,\n   Fort St.George,\n   Chennai- 600 009.\n\n2. Competent Authority and\n   District Revenue Officer,\n   Theni District,\n   Theni- 625 531.\n\n3. The Superintendent of Police,\n   Theni- 625 531.\n\n4. K.Srinivasan\n\n                              ...  Respondents\n                         \t\n\t\nWrit Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of\nIndia to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ or Order or\nDirection in the nature of the Writ calling for the records relating to the\nproceedings in G.O.Ms.No.1612 Home (Police-XIX) Department, dated 4.12.2008 on\nthe file of the first respondent herein and to quash the same in so far as the\nland bearing Survey No.2592\/20 to an extent of 6422 Sq.ft., situated at\nThamaraikulam, Lakshmipuram in Theni District, described as item 3 in the\nschedule attached to the impugned order is concerned.\n\n!For Petitioners ... Mr. S.Subbiah\n^For Respondents ... Mr.K.A.Thirumalayappan\n                     Addl.Govt.Pleader.\n\nORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tWith the consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for<br \/>\nfinaly hearing.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2.  The 4th respondent is a partner in the business and the Partnership<br \/>\nFirm received  deposits from public and failed to return the deposits.<br \/>\nTherefore, a case was registered by the 3rd respondent against the said<br \/>\nPartnership Firm and its partners as per the provisions of Tamil Nadu Act 44 of<br \/>\n1997 and in pursuance of the power under Section 3 of the said Act, the 1st<br \/>\nrespondent passed an interim order of attachment of the immoveable properties<br \/>\ndescribed in the schedule thereto which according to the 1st respondent are the<br \/>\nproperties belonging to the partners of the said Firm.  The 1st respondent by<br \/>\norder dated 4.12.2008 appointed the 2nd respondent as the Competent Authority<br \/>\nand transferred to him all the assets of the Partnership Firm and its partners<br \/>\nto take further action as per Section 4 of the said Act.  The petitioners<br \/>\nchallenged the order of ad-interim attachment passed by the 1st respondent made<br \/>\nin G.O.Ms.No.1612 Home (Police-XIX) Department, dated 4.12.2008 in so far as the<br \/>\nland bearing Survey No.2592\/20 to an extent of 6422 Sq.ft., described as Item 3<br \/>\nto the schedule attached to the impugned order, in this Writ Petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. Mr.S.Subbiah, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that<br \/>\nItem 3 of the property mentioned in the impugned attachment order originally<br \/>\nbelonged to S.Krishnaswamy Naicker and he purchased the same under registered<br \/>\nsale deed dated 30.5.1990. He died leaving behind the petitioners and the 4th<br \/>\nrespondent as his heirs and the 4th respondent is entitled to 1\/9th share in the<br \/>\nproperty.  Therefore, even assuming that the attachment order can be made<br \/>\nagainst that property that can be confined only to 1\/9th share of the 4th<br \/>\nrespondent and the entire property cannot be attached. He further submitted that<br \/>\nas per Section 4(3) of the said Act, on receipt of the Government order passed<br \/>\nunder Section 3 of the Act, the 2nd respondent who is the Competent Authority<br \/>\nshall apply within 30 days to the Special Court constituted under the Act for<br \/>\nmaking the ad-interim order of attachment absolute.  He therefore, submitted<br \/>\nthat no application was made within 30 days from the date of impugned order<br \/>\nbefore the Special Court by the 2nd respondent and therefore, the attachment<br \/>\ncannot have any legal effect.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4.  On the other hand, Mr.K.A.Thiurmalayappan, the learned Additional<br \/>\nGovernment Pleader reiterated the allegations made in the counter affidavit and<br \/>\nsubmitted that the 4th respondent and his partners have cheated the public and<br \/>\nmisappropriated the deposits made by the public and as per the provisions of the<br \/>\nsaid Act action was taken and ad-interim order of attachment was passed<br \/>\nattaching the properties belonging to the partners and Item 3 of the schedule of<br \/>\nproperty belongs to the 4th respondent and therefore the property was also<br \/>\nincluded the order of attachment and the petitioners who claimed to have any<br \/>\nshare in the property   can apply to the Special Court as per the provisions of<br \/>\nSection 7 by raising any objections and the Special Court will pass an order on<br \/>\nthe basis of objections raised by the petitioners and therefore the petitioners<br \/>\nare having effective alternative remedy and hence the writ petitiion is not<br \/>\nmaintainable.  He further contended that the property of the 4th respondent and<br \/>\nthe petitioners have not been divided by metes and bounds and hence the 4th<br \/>\nrespondent is one of the co-owners of the property and therefore the entire<br \/>\nproperties are liable to be attached and the proceedings are pending before the<br \/>\nSpecial Court for making the interim order of attachment absolute.  He,<br \/>\ntherefore, submitted that the remedy that is available to the petitioners is to<br \/>\napproach the Special Court and the writ petition is not maintainable.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. Heard both sides.\n<\/p>\n<p>    6. It is admitted that the ad-interim attachment was passed on 4.12.2008.<br \/>\nIt is further admitted that the property namely Item 3 in Survey No.2592\/20 to<br \/>\nan extent of 6422 Sq.ft., belongs to S.Krishnaswamy Naicker, the father of the<br \/>\npetitioners 2 to 8, husband of the 1st petitioner and father of the 4th<br \/>\nrespondent.  He purchased the same under a registered sale deed dated 30.5.1990.<br \/>\nThe said Krishnaswamy Naicker died intestate and therefore after him, the<br \/>\npetitioners and the 4th respondent are entitled to 1\/9th share in the said<br \/>\nproperty and hence the 4th respondent can not be construed as full owner of the<br \/>\nsaid  property\tand he is only entitled to 1\/9th share in the said property.<br \/>\nTherefore, the order of attachment in respect of whole of the property mentioned<br \/>\nin Item 3 in respect of Survey No.2592\/20 to an extent of 6422 Sq.ft., is not<br \/>\nproper.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7.  Further, as per Section 4(3) of the said Act, after the order was made<br \/>\nby the 1st respondent attaching the properties, the Competent Authority namely<br \/>\nthe 2nd respondent should approach the Court constituted for that purpose within<br \/>\na period of 30 days for making the ad-interim order of attachment absolute.  It<br \/>\nis admitted by the learned Additional Government Pleader that the application<br \/>\nunder Section 4(3) of the Act was not filed within 30 days and it was filed<br \/>\nbelatedly and the application to condone the delay was also filed and it is<br \/>\npending before the Special Court.  Therefore, it is admitted that within 30 days<br \/>\nthe application was not filed before the Special Court for making the ad-interim<br \/>\norder of attachment absolute.  Under Section 7 of the Act, when an application<br \/>\nis pending before the Special Court filed by the Competent Authority to make the<br \/>\nad-interim order of attachment absolute, the affected party can file objections<br \/>\nabout the order of attachment and if such objection is made, the Special Court<br \/>\nshall decide the objection and pass final orders within a period of six months.<br \/>\nTherefore, the question of filing an objection before the Special Court arises<br \/>\nonly when an application is pending before the Special Court filed by the<br \/>\nCompetent Authority under Section 4(3) of the said Act.  In this case admittedly<br \/>\nthat application is not taken up on file as there was a delay and the<br \/>\napplication for condoning the delay is pending, hence it cannot be contended by<br \/>\nthe respondents that the petitioners have to approach the Special Court for<br \/>\nraising the attachment and they cannot file the writ petition. As no application<br \/>\nis pending before the Special Court for making the ad-interim order of<br \/>\nattachment absolute, the petitioners cannot file any objection before the<br \/>\nSpecial Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8.  Mr.S.Subbiah, the learned counsel for the petitioners also relied upon<br \/>\nthe Judgement reported in 2008 (4) MLJ, 211 <a href=\"\/doc\/1365626\/\">(P.Venkatesan v. State of Tamil Nadu<br \/>\nand others<\/a>) and submitted that even in a case where application was filed in<br \/>\ntime and final order was not passed within a period of six months from the date<br \/>\nof objections raised by the parties, then final order has no legal sanctity.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9. As stated supra, in this case no application is pending before the<br \/>\nSpecial Court for making ad-interim order of attachment absolute and hence the<br \/>\nquestion of filing the application before the Special Court by the petitioners<br \/>\ndoes not arise. However, having regard to the fact that the petitioners are<br \/>\nentitled to 8\/9th share together in the said property and the 4th respondent is<br \/>\nentitled to 1\/9th share in the said property, the ad-interim order of attachment<br \/>\nis having effect only in respect of 1\/9th share of the 4th respondent and it<br \/>\ncannot have any effect on the 8\/9th share of the petitioners.  Hence, by the ad-<br \/>\ninterim order of attachment, the petitioners 8\/9th share cannot be attached and<br \/>\nit is free from attachment and the attachment order is effective only in respect<br \/>\nof undivided 1\/9th share of the 4th respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tWith the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.<br \/>\nConsequently, the connected M.P.No.3 of 2009 is also closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>kr.\n<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1. The Principal Secretary to Government,<br \/>\n   Home (Police-XIX) Department,<br \/>\n   Government of Tamil Nadu,<br \/>\n   Fort St.George,<br \/>\n   Chennai- 600 009.\n<\/p>\n<p>2. Competent Authority and<br \/>\n   District Revenue Officer,<br \/>\n   Theni District,<br \/>\n   Theni- 625 531.\n<\/p>\n<p>3. The Superintendent of Police,<br \/>\n   Theni- 625 531.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Andalammal vs The Principal Secretary To &#8230; on 8 April, 2010 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 8\/4\/2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.RAMANATHAN W.P.(MD)No.10259 of 2009 and M.P.(MD)No.3 of 2008 1. Andalammal 2. Ramakrishnammal 3. S.K.Ramasamy 4. Seethalakshmi 5. Jayalakshmi 6. Jayabharathi 7. S.K.Kannan 8. Geetha &#8230; Petitioners Vs. [&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-36979","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>Andalammal vs The Principal Secretary To ... on 8 April, 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\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Andalammal vs The Principal Secretary To ... on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-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=\"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-03-18T16:46:17+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Andalammal vs The Principal Secretary To &#8230; on 8 April, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-18T16:46:17+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1337,\"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\\\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010\",\"name\":\"Andalammal vs The Principal Secretary To ... on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-18T16:46:17+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Andalammal vs The Principal Secretary To &#8230; on 8 April, 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":"Andalammal vs The Principal Secretary To ... on 8 April, 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\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Andalammal vs The Principal Secretary To ... on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-03-18T16:46:17+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Andalammal vs The Principal Secretary To &#8230; on 8 April, 2010","datePublished":"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-18T16:46:17+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010"},"wordCount":1337,"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\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010","name":"Andalammal vs The Principal Secretary To ... on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-18T16:46:17+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/andalammal-vs-the-principal-secretary-to-on-8-april-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Andalammal vs The Principal Secretary To &#8230; on 8 April, 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\/36979","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=36979"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/36979\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=36979"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=36979"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=36979"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}