{"id":3941,"date":"2007-10-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-10-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007"},"modified":"2014-01-28T10:41:11","modified_gmt":"2014-01-28T05:11:11","slug":"sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007","title":{"rendered":"Sebi Joseph vs The Ernakulam District Postal … on 19 October, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Sebi Joseph vs The Ernakulam District Postal … on 19 October, 2007<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRSA No. 776 of 2007()\n\n\n1. SEBI JOSEPH, S\/O.LATE N.V.JOSEPH,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT POSTAL TELECOM\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.GEORGE ZACHARIAH ERUTHICKEL\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN(CAVEATOR)\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR\n\n Dated :19\/10\/2007\n\n O R D E R\n                     M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.\n\n                        ...........................................\n\n                       R.S.A.No. 776     OF   2007\n\n                       ............................................\n\n       DATED THIS THE    19th    DAY OF  OCTOBER, 2007\n\n\n                                   JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
      Defendant   in   O.S.773   of   2003   before   Additional   Munsiff<\/p>\n
Court,   Ernakulam   is   the   appellant.     Plaintiff   is   the   respondent.<\/p>\n
Respondent instituted the suit seeking recovery of possession of<\/p>\n
plaint   schedule   building.     Building   belongs   to   respondent     Co-<\/p>\n
operative   Society   which   is   exempted   under   the   provisions   of<\/p>\n
Kerala   Building   Lease   and   Rent   Control   Act   as   per   notification<\/p>\n
S.R.O   1225\/79,   published   in   the   gazette   dated   5.10.1979.   The<\/p>\n
plaint schedule building  was obtained on rent by Joseph, father<\/p>\n
of appellant. On    his  death,  appellant continuing   possession  of<\/p>\n
the building paid rent to respondent society.  Respondent sent a<\/p>\n
notice,   copy   of   which   was  produced   as   Ext.A4,   terminating   the<\/p>\n
tenancy and demanding surrender of possession.   Appellant did<\/p>\n
not surrender.  Therefore suit was instituted.  Appellant resisted<\/p>\n
the   suit     contending   that   respondent   is   not   exempted   from   the<\/p>\n
provisions of Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act and<\/p>\n
he   received   a   notice   sent   by   respondent   demanding   vacant<\/p>\n
possession and though notice was issued under the provisions of<\/p>\n
Transfer of Property Act, a resolution was passed by respondent<\/p>\n
RSA 776\/2007                             2<\/span><\/p>\n
to take possession before the expiry of notice and it is illegal.  It<\/p>\n
was also contended that the notice is not in compliance with the<\/p>\n
mandatory provisions of Section 106 of Transfer of Property Act.<\/p>\n
It was therefore contended that respondent is not entitled to the<\/p>\n
decree sought for.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      2.   Learned Munsiff, on the evidence of PWs 1 and 2, DW1<\/p>\n
and   Exts.A1   to   A6,   granted   a   decree   directing   appellant   to<\/p>\n
surrender vacant possession of the building within three months.<\/p>\n
Appellant   challenged   the   decree   and   judgment   before   District<\/p>\n
Court,   Ernakulam   in   A.S.348   of   2005.     Learned   Additional<\/p>\n
District   Judge,   on   reappreciation   of   evidence,   confirmed   the<\/p>\n
findings   of   learned   Munsiff   and   dismissed   the   appeal.   It   is<\/p>\n
challenged in the second appeal.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      3.   Learned   counsel   appearing   for   appellant   and   learned<\/p>\n
counsel   appearing   for   respondent,   who   appeared   by   filing     a<\/p>\n
caveat were heard.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      4.     The   argument   of   learned   counsel   appearing   for<\/p>\n
appellant   is   that   there   is   no   valid   termination   of   tenancy   as<\/p>\n
provided under Section 106 of Transfer of Property Act.   It was<\/p>\n
argued   that     the   allegation   in   the   plaint   was   that   a   registered<\/p>\n
notice   demanding   vacant   possession   was   issued   on   12.12.2002<\/p>\n
RSA 776\/2007                            3<\/span><\/p>\n
and it was received by appellant on 13.12.2002 and the period of<\/p>\n
tenancy   expired   27.12.2002   and   Ext.A4   was   produced   later<\/p>\n
which  is not in confirmity with the  pleadings  as  the said notice<\/p>\n
demands   surrender   of   possession   within   30   days   and   therefore<\/p>\n
Ext.A4 is not the notice which was sent to the appellant.   It was<\/p>\n
also   argued   that   even   though   Ext.A4,   copy   of   the   notice   was<\/p>\n
subsequently produced, plaint was not amended and therefore as<\/p>\n
per   the   plaint,   tenancy   was   terminated   on   27.12.2002   and<\/p>\n
therefore   Ext.A4   should   not   have   been   relied   on   by   the   courts<\/p>\n
below.     Relying   on   the   decision   of   Apex   Court   in  Ranade   V.<\/p>\n
Union   of   India<\/a>(1964   SC   24)   and   High   Court   of   Karnataka   in<\/p>\n
S.S.Yelimeli V. Chanabasappa(AIR 1979 Karnataka 52), it was<\/p>\n
argued that when there is a contradiction between pleading and<\/p>\n
evidence, evidence cannot be looked into and evidence contrary<\/p>\n
to   the   pleading   are   to   be   eschewed   and   without   proper<\/p>\n
amendment   of   the   plaint   Ext.A4   is   not   a   valid   notice.     Learned<\/p>\n
counsel  argued   that   in  such   circumstances,  the   decree   granted<\/p>\n
is unsustainable.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      5.   Learned counsel  appearing  for respondent argued  that<\/p>\n
what   was   pleaded     in   the   plaint   was   that   a   notice   demanding<\/p>\n
surrender of possession was issued on 12.12.2002 and as per the<\/p>\n
RSA 776\/2007                             4<\/span><\/p>\n
notice, the tenancy was determined by 15 days notice and that is<\/p>\n
why it was stated that tenancy expired on 27.12.2002 and there<\/p>\n
is   no   pleading   that   surrender   of   possession   was   demanded   on<\/p>\n
27.12.2002   and   Ext.A4   is   the   copy   of   the   notice   sent   by<\/p>\n
respondent and received by appellant.  It was also argued that if<\/p>\n
Ext.A4   is   not   the   copy   of   the   notice   sent,   appellant   could   have<\/p>\n
produced   the   original   notice   received   by   him   and   there   is   no<\/p>\n
conflict between the pleading and evidence and as tenancy was<\/p>\n
validly terminated, decree is sustainable.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      6.   Ext.A4 was produced by respondent as the copy of the<\/p>\n
notice sent to appellant as pleaded in the plaint.  If that was not<\/p>\n
the   notice,   appellant   could   have   produced   the   original   notice<\/p>\n
admittedly   received   on   13.12.2002,   as   it   should   be   with   the<\/p>\n
appellant.   Even at the time of evidence, there was no case that<\/p>\n
the original notice sent by respondent and received by appellant<\/p>\n
was not available with   him to be produced before  the court or<\/p>\n
that   Ext.A4   is   not   the   copy   of   the   notice   received.   In   such<\/p>\n
circumstances, appellant cannot be heard to contend that Ext.A4<\/p>\n
is not the copy of the notice sent by respondent and received by<\/p>\n
appellant.     Therefore   courts   below   were   justified   in   relying   on<\/p>\n
Ext.A4,   as   copy   of   the   notice   sent   by   respondent   before   the<\/p>\n
RSA 776\/2007                            5<\/span><\/p>\n
institution of the suit.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      7.     Then the question is whether there is a conflict in the<\/p>\n
pleading   and   evidence   as   canvassed   by   learned   counsel<\/p>\n
appearing   for  appellant.   If   there  is   a  pleading   that  the   tenancy<\/p>\n
was   terminated   and   surrender   of   vacant   possession   of   the<\/p>\n
building   was   demanded   on   27.12.2002,   argument   of   learned<\/p>\n
counsel   could  have   been   accepted. What  was  pleaded  was only<\/p>\n
that period of notice expired on 27.12.2002.   Ext.A4 shows that<\/p>\n
notice was sent on 12.12.2002 terminating the tenancy within 15<\/p>\n
days from that date. It is in such circumstances, it was pleaded<\/p>\n
that   the   period   of   notice   ended   on   27.12.2002.     Therefore   I   do<\/p>\n
not find   any substantial question of law involved in the appeal.<\/p>\n
Ext.A4   notice   was   sent   on   12.12.2002.     It   was   admittedly<\/p>\n
received   on   13.12.2002.   Under   Ext.A4   tenancy   was   terminated<\/p>\n
with   fifteen   days   notice   and   appellant   was   asked   to   hand   over<\/p>\n
possession   within   one   month   from   the   date   of   receipt   of   the<\/p>\n
notice.  Still suit was filed only on 11.4.2003.  Hence it is a valid<\/p>\n
notice.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
        8. Being a Co-operative society  in view of the  notification<\/p>\n
issued   under   Section   25,   whereunder   provisions   of   Kerala<\/p>\n
Buildings (Lease and Rent Control )Act is exempted, appellant is<\/p>\n
RSA 776\/2007                             6<\/span><\/p>\n
not   entitled   to   claim   the   benefit   of   the   said   Act.   I   find   no<\/p>\n
substantial   question   of   law   involved   in   the   appeal.   It   is<\/p>\n
dismissed. In the circumstances of the case, appellant is granted<\/p>\n
six months time from today to surrender vacant possession of the<\/p>\n
building provided he pays the rent payable.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                  M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE<\/p>\n
lgk\/-\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Sebi Joseph vs The Ernakulam District Postal … on 19 October, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RSA No. 776 of 2007() 1. SEBI JOSEPH, S\/O.LATE N.V.JOSEPH, … Petitioner Vs 1. THE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT POSTAL TELECOM … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.GEORGE ZACHARIAH ERUTHICKEL For Respondent :SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN(CAVEATOR) The Hon’ble […]<\/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-3941","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSebi Joseph vs The Ernakulam District Postal ... on 19 October, 2007 - 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\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sebi Joseph vs The Ernakulam District Postal ... on 19 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-01-28T05:11:11+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\\\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sebi Joseph vs The Ernakulam District Postal … on 19 October, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-01-28T05:11:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1048,\"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\\\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007\",\"name\":\"Sebi Joseph vs The Ernakulam District Postal ... on 19 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-01-28T05:11:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sebi Joseph vs The Ernakulam District Postal … on 19 October, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"Sebi Joseph vs The Ernakulam District Postal ... on 19 October, 2007 - 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\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sebi Joseph vs The Ernakulam District Postal ... on 19 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-01-28T05:11:11+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\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sebi Joseph vs The Ernakulam District Postal … on 19 October, 2007","datePublished":"2007-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-01-28T05:11:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007"},"wordCount":1048,"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\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007","name":"Sebi Joseph vs The Ernakulam District Postal ... on 19 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-01-28T05:11:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sebi-joseph-vs-the-ernakulam-district-postal-on-19-october-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sebi Joseph vs The Ernakulam District Postal … on 19 October, 2007"}]},{"@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\/3941","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=3941"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3941\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3941"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3941"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3941"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}