{"id":43105,"date":"2010-04-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010"},"modified":"2018-05-30T16:51:00","modified_gmt":"2018-05-30T11:21:00","slug":"panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010","title":{"rendered":"Panambron Nabeesumma vs State Of Kerala on 9 April, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Panambron Nabeesumma vs State Of Kerala on 9 April, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCRP.No. 2857 of 2000(H)\n\n\n\n1. PANAMBRON NABEESUMMA\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SMT.VIDHYA. A.C\n\n                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN\n\n Dated :09\/04\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n            S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.\n           ---------------------------------------\n              C.RP.Nos.2857 & 2949 of 2000\n           ---------------------------------------\n       Dated this the 9th day of April, 2010\n\n                        O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
           These two revisions are filed challenging the<\/p>\n
orders passed by the Taluk Land Board, Thalassery in the<\/p>\n
ceiling proceedings, numbered TLB-1253\/73\/Tly, in<\/p>\n
respect of one Sri.Kunnath Chirayil Abdul Rahiman, the<\/p>\n
declarant in the said proceeding. C.R.P.No.2857\/00 is<\/p>\n
filed by the widow and some of the children of the<\/p>\n
abovesaid    Abdul      Rahiman       and      the    other,<\/p>\n
C.R.P.No.2949\/00 by one of his sons.\n<\/p>\n
           2. Short facts giving rise to these revisions<\/p>\n
may be summed up thus:\n<\/p>\n
           Sri.Kunnath      Chirayil     Abdul     Rahiman<\/p>\n
submitted a ceiling return in respect of the properties<\/p>\n
held by him as mandated by Section 85(2) of the Kerala<\/p>\n
Land Reforms Act {for short “the Act”}.           His family<\/p>\n
consisted of 9 members including him and the Taluk<\/p>\n
Land Board, on determination of the excess area held by<\/p>\n
him, found that he is entitled to have a deduction of 20<\/p>\n
C.RP.Nos.2857 & 2949 of 2000<\/p>\n
                           :: 2 ::\n<\/p>\n
\nacres, the maximum limit fixed under the Act.      Apart<\/p>\n
from the above extent of land, the declarant was also<\/p>\n
entitled to exemption of 22.5 cents under Section 81 of<\/p>\n
the Act.   The excess land to be surrendered by the<\/p>\n
statement giver was determined as 29 acres. Pending<\/p>\n
the proceedings over the determination of the excess<\/p>\n
area, the statement giver had passed away and,<\/p>\n
therefore, notices with draft statement were issued to his<\/p>\n
widow.    In response to such notices, the widow and<\/p>\n
another one Kandoth Hamza filed objections over the<\/p>\n
determination of the excess area of the declarant. The<\/p>\n
Taluk Land Board, after due enquiry and examining the<\/p>\n
objections determined the excess area of late Abdul<\/p>\n
Rahiman as23 acres 55 cents and directed his legal<\/p>\n
representatives to surrender that excess area.       The<\/p>\n
widow     of   Abdul    Rahiman,    first petitioner   in<\/p>\n
C.R.P.No.2857\/00, challenged that order before this<\/p>\n
court filing a revision C.R.P.No.1424\/77.    Sri.Kandoth<\/p>\n
Hamza, who also objected to the determination of the<\/p>\n
C.RP.Nos.2857 & 2949 of 2000<\/p>\n
                           :: 3 ::\n<\/p>\n
\nexcess area filed another revision C.R.P.No.1410\/77.<\/p>\n
This court by common order dated 21.3.1979 disposed<\/p>\n
both the above revisions directing the Taluk Land Board<\/p>\n
to consider the matter afresh after giving opportunity to<\/p>\n
both parties, and pass an order on merits.      On such<\/p>\n
remission, the Taluk Land Board conducted further<\/p>\n
enquiry in which the legal representatives of Abdul<\/p>\n
Rahiman and also Kandoth Hamza let in evidence to<\/p>\n
substantiate their objections.    After such enquiry, the<\/p>\n
Taluk Land Board passed an order on 29.3.1984<\/p>\n
determining the excess area to be surrendered by the<\/p>\n
statement giver as 17 acres 69 cents. That order of the<\/p>\n
Taluk Land Board was challenged by the widow         and<\/p>\n
some children of statement giver Abdul Rahiman filing<\/p>\n
C.R.P.No.1334\/84. Another revision was separately filed<\/p>\n
by three others, who are also the children of the<\/p>\n
statement giver Abdul Rahiman as C.R.P.No.1460\/84.<\/p>\n
Both those revisions were heard together and disposed of<\/p>\n
by a common order dated 22.7.1987. The challenges<\/p>\n
C.RP.Nos.2857 & 2949 of 2000<\/p>\n
                           :: 4 ::\n<\/p>\n
\ncanvassed in the revision related to objection Nos.3, 5<\/p>\n
and 7 raised before the Taluk Land Board. Objection<\/p>\n
No.3 raised by the legal representatives of Abdul<\/p>\n
Rahiman related to the claim set up by one of the<\/p>\n
daughters of the statement giver, Smt.Kunhamina, was<\/p>\n
married before 1.1.1970, and so much so, the land in her<\/p>\n
possession as a donee from Abdul Rahiman should be<\/p>\n
excluded from his account. Objection No.5 related to the<\/p>\n
claim over 4.50 acres of land in the possession of another<\/p>\n
daughter Panapurial Mariamma as a tenant. Though the<\/p>\n
document executed in her favour is styled as a sale deed,<\/p>\n
the nomenclature was not decisive and under that deed,<\/p>\n
she had obtained tenancy right over that property was<\/p>\n
the tenor of the objection. The Taluk Land Board has<\/p>\n
repelled the aforesaid claims set up over the property<\/p>\n
determined as that of Abdul Rahiman. This court in the<\/p>\n
common order disposing the revisions set aside the order<\/p>\n
of the Taluk Land Board with respect to the objection<\/p>\n
Nos.3 and 5 raised as above, directing the Board to<\/p>\n
C.RP.Nos.2857 & 2949 of 2000<\/p>\n
                           :: 5 ::\n<\/p>\n
\nexamine such objections for de novo consideration.<\/p>\n
Objection No.7 repelled by the Taluk Land Board, which<\/p>\n
was challenged by the revision petitions was found<\/p>\n
meritless, and the challenge canvassed thereof was<\/p>\n
negatived.    This court has passed an order in the<\/p>\n
revisions as indicated below:\n<\/p>\n
          “The order of the Taluk Land Board insofar<\/p>\n
       as it relates to objection Nos.3 and 5, is set<\/p>\n
       aside; and the case covered by those objections<\/p>\n
       is remanded to the Taluk Land Board for a de<\/p>\n
       novo consideration. In all other respects, the<\/p>\n
       order is sustained.” (Emphasis supplied)<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
           3. Pursuant to such remission, the Taluk Land<\/p>\n
Board considered the objections raised in respect of<\/p>\n
objection   Nos.3    and   5   canvassed    by  the   legal<\/p>\n
representatives of the statement giver and the present<\/p>\n
orders have been passed sustaining the objections and<\/p>\n
granting exemption to the land covered by such<\/p>\n
objections from the excess area determined as that of the<\/p>\n
statement giver.      The legal representatives of the<\/p>\n
statement giver not being satisfied with the orders<\/p>\n
C.RP.Nos.2857 & 2949 of 2000<\/p>\n
                           :: 6 ::\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
<\/blockquote>\n
passed by the Taluk Land Board, as indicated above,<\/p>\n
have filed these two revisions under Section 103 of the<\/p>\n
Act.\n<\/p>\n
            4. I heard the counsel on both sides.\n<\/p>\n
            5. Perusing the orders passed by the Taluk<\/p>\n
Land Board with reference to the previous common order<\/p>\n
passed on 22.7.1987 in C.R.P.Nos.1334\/84 and 1460\/84, I<\/p>\n
find, it is not open to the legal representatives of the<\/p>\n
statement giver to re-open any of the issues concluded<\/p>\n
under the common order in the aforesaid revisions.<\/p>\n
Whatever be the objections canvassed by the legal<\/p>\n
representatives of the statement giver against the<\/p>\n
determination of the excess area after the disposal of the<\/p>\n
revision petitions, a further enquiry by the Taluk Land<\/p>\n
Board was permissible only in respect of objection Nos.3<\/p>\n
and 5 alone and it is not open to any of them to take up<\/p>\n
any objection with respect to any other matter turned<\/p>\n
down by the Taluk Land Board and the decision thereof<\/p>\n
upheld by this court in the revisions. The Taluk Land<\/p>\n
C.RP.Nos.2857 & 2949 of 2000<\/p>\n
                           :: 7 ::\n<\/p>\n
\nBoard under the impugned order has upheld the<\/p>\n
objections raised in respect of objection Nos.3 and 5 in<\/p>\n
its entirety and has excluded the land covered by the<\/p>\n
objections from the excess area determined as that of the<\/p>\n
statement giver, the declarant, for surrender. The Taluk<\/p>\n
Land Board, after exempting the lands covered by<\/p>\n
objection Nos.3 and 5, had directed the surrender 10<\/p>\n
acres and 19 cents of land as the excess area of the<\/p>\n
statement giver. In response to the opportunity extended<\/p>\n
to the legal representatives to furnish their option, the<\/p>\n
widow of the statement giver had filed a statement with a<\/p>\n
plan. After due enquiry through the authorised office,<\/p>\n
the Board has determined and specified the land with<\/p>\n
particulars of Survey number to be surrendered by the<\/p>\n
legal representatives of the statement giver.        The<\/p>\n
challenge canvassed by filing these revisions, even after<\/p>\n
the Taluk Land Board has upheld objection Nos.3 and 5<\/p>\n
and exempted the lands covered under those objections,<\/p>\n
no   doubt,   indicates    the   attempt  of  the   legal<\/p>\n
C.RP.Nos.2857 & 2949 of 2000<\/p>\n
                           :: 8 ::\n<\/p>\n
\nrepresentatives of the declarant to delay the surrender of<\/p>\n
the excess area determined under the impugned order by<\/p>\n
the Taluk Land Board.       By virtue of these revisions,<\/p>\n
considerable delay had been caused in taking over<\/p>\n
possession of such excess area, though no ground<\/p>\n
whatsoever was available to the legal representatives of<\/p>\n
the statement giver to impeach the legality, propriety<\/p>\n
and correctness of the orders of the Taluk Land Board.<\/p>\n
           There is no merit in the revisions, and both<\/p>\n
the revisions are dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                        Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
                              (S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN)
\n                                        JUDGE
\nsk\/-\n<\/p>\n
           \/\/true copy\/\/<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Panambron Nabeesumma vs State Of Kerala on 9 April, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM CRP.No. 2857 of 2000(H) 1. PANAMBRON NABEESUMMA … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA … Respondent For Petitioner :SMT.VIDHYA. A.C For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER The Hon’ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN Dated :09\/04\/2010 O R D […]<\/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-43105","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nPanambron Nabeesumma vs State Of Kerala on 9 April, 2010 - 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\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Panambron Nabeesumma vs State Of Kerala on 9 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-04-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-30T11:21:00+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\\\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Panambron Nabeesumma vs State Of Kerala on 9 April, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-30T11:21:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1278,\"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\\\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010\",\"name\":\"Panambron Nabeesumma vs State Of Kerala on 9 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-30T11:21:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Panambron Nabeesumma vs State Of Kerala on 9 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":"Panambron Nabeesumma vs State Of Kerala on 9 April, 2010 - 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\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Panambron Nabeesumma vs State Of Kerala on 9 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-04-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-30T11:21:00+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\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Panambron Nabeesumma vs State Of Kerala on 9 April, 2010","datePublished":"2010-04-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-30T11:21:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010"},"wordCount":1278,"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\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010","name":"Panambron Nabeesumma vs State Of Kerala on 9 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-04-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-30T11:21:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panambron-nabeesumma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-9-april-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Panambron Nabeesumma vs State Of Kerala on 9 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\/43105","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=43105"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43105\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=43105"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=43105"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=43105"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}