{"id":46663,"date":"2007-07-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-07-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007"},"modified":"2017-12-12T06:41:16","modified_gmt":"2017-12-12T01:11:16","slug":"esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007","title":{"rendered":"Esakki Amma Saraswathy vs Thankamoni on 24 July, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Esakki Amma Saraswathy vs Thankamoni on 24 July, 2007<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRSA No. 649 of 2007()\n\n\n1. ESAKKI AMMA SARASWATHY, AGED 61,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THANKAMONI, D\/O.ESAKKI AMMA, AGED 48,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. OMANA, D\/O.ESAKKI  AMMA, AGED 46 YEARS,\n\n3. CHELLAPPAN CHETTIAR KRISHNAN CHETTIAR,\n\n4. ESAKKI AMMA PONNAMMA, AGED 56 YEARS,\n\n5. CHELLAPPAN CHETTIAR ARJUNAN CHETTIAR,\n\n6. ESAKKI AMMA RAJAMMA AGED 52 YEARS,\n\n7. ESAKKI AMMA MEENAKSHY, AGED 50 YEARS,\n\n8. CHANDRAN, S\/O.CHELLAMMA, AGED 35 YEARS,\n\n9. THANKAMANI, D\/O.CHELLAMMA, AGED 33 YEARS\n\n10. THANKACHAN, S\/O.CHELLAMMA, AGED 31 YEARS\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.G.P.SHINOD\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR\n\n Dated :24\/07\/2007\n\n O R D E R\n                 M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.\n                   ...........................................\n               R.S.A.Nos. 649 & 650                 OF 2007\n                  ............................................\n         DATED THIS THE 24th                 DAY OF JULY, 2007\n\n                              JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
       Appellant is the plaintiff in O.S.108 of 1986 and first<\/p>\n
defendant in O.S.540 of 1986, instituted by respondents 1 and 2<\/p>\n
the defendants in O.S.108 of 1996. O.S.108 of 1996 was filed<\/p>\n
seeking a decree for partition and O.S.540 of 1986 was filed<\/p>\n
seeking a decree for declaration of title and possession of the<\/p>\n
plaint schedule property. The case of appellant was that plaint<\/p>\n
schedule property originally belonged to Late Chellappan<\/p>\n
Chettiar and first respondent is his wife and on the death of<\/p>\n
Chellappan Chettiar it devolved on first respondent appellant<\/p>\n
and respondents 2 to 9 and they are in the joint possession and<\/p>\n
enjoyment of the property and while Chellappan Chettiar was<\/p>\n
alive he obtained kudikidappu right as per order in O.A.2608\/70<\/p>\n
and that right devolved on his wife and children and therefore<\/p>\n
plaint schedule property is to be divided into ten equal shares<\/p>\n
and one such share is to be alloted to the appellant ignoring the<\/p>\n
alienations made. Respondents 1 to 3 in their written statement<\/p>\n
contended    that   deceased           Chellappan             Chettiar was a<\/p>\n
kudikidappukaran in the plaint schedule property and it was he<\/p>\n
RSA 649 & 650\/07                 2<\/span><\/p>\n
who constructed the building and he purchased the kudikidappu<\/p>\n
right as per the purchase certificate granted in O.A.2608\/70 and<\/p>\n
respondents 2 and 3 obtained title to the property as per Ext.A2<\/p>\n
sale deed dated 21.12.1970 executed by Chellappan Chettiar in<\/p>\n
favour of first respondent and therefore respondents 2 and 3 are<\/p>\n
the absolute owners of the property and the property was<\/p>\n
mutated in their name and it is not in the joint possession of the<\/p>\n
appellant or other children of deceased Chellappan Chettiar and<\/p>\n
therefore appellant is not entitled to the decree for partition<\/p>\n
sought for. In O.S.540 of 1986, respondents 2 and 3 sought a<\/p>\n
decree for declaration of their title    to the plaint schedule<\/p>\n
property under Ext.A3 sale deed executed by           Chellappan<\/p>\n
Chettiar in their favour. It was contended that appellant is in<\/p>\n
possession of two rooms as permitted by Chellappan Chettiar<\/p>\n
and she is in permissive occupation of the room and as<\/p>\n
respondents 2 and 3 have title to the property, they are entitled<\/p>\n
to get a decree for declaration of their title and have a<\/p>\n
mandatory injunction.\n<\/p>\n
      2. Learned Munsiff jointly tried both the suits. On the<\/p>\n
evidence of Pws 1 to 3, DW1 and Exts.A1 to A4, learned Munsiff<\/p>\n
found that under Ext.A1 the kudikidappu right was purchased by<\/p>\n
Chellappan Chettiar and Ext.A1 will not enure to the benefit of<\/p>\n
his wife and children and Chellappan Chettiar under Ext.A2 sold<\/p>\n
RSA 649 & 650\/07                3<\/span><\/p>\n
the property in favour of respondents 2 and 2 and therefore<\/p>\n
respondents 2 and 3 have title to the plaint schedule property.<\/p>\n
Learned Munsiff declared the title and also granted a decree for<\/p>\n
injunction restraining appellants and other defendants from<\/p>\n
interfering with their possession.    A decree for mandatory<\/p>\n
injunction was also granted directing appellant and other<\/p>\n
defendants to put respondents 2 and 3 in possession of the<\/p>\n
building in their possession finding that they are only in<\/p>\n
permissive possession of the property. Consequently O.S.108 of<\/p>\n
1986 was dismissed.     Appellant challenged the decree and<\/p>\n
judgment in O.S.108 of 1986 in A.S.281 of 1997 and the decree<\/p>\n
and judgment in O.S.540 of 1986 in A.S.282 of 1997 before<\/p>\n
District Court, Thiruvananthapuram.         Learned Additional<\/p>\n
District Judge, on reappreciation of evidence, confirmed the<\/p>\n
findings of learned Munsiff and dismissed both the appeals. It is<\/p>\n
challenged in these second appeals.\n<\/p>\n
     3. R.S.A.649 of 2007 is filed against the concurrent decree<\/p>\n
and judgment in O.S.108 of 1986 and R.S.A.650 of 2007 is filed<\/p>\n
against    the concurrent decree and judgment in O.S. 540 of<\/p>\n
1986. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant was heard.<\/p>\n
The argument of the learned counsel is that the courts below on<\/p>\n
the evidence should have found that Ext.A1 purchase certificate<\/p>\n
was obtained by Chellappan Chettiar not on his independent<\/p>\n
RSA 649 & 650\/07                4<\/span><\/p>\n
right but for the family and therefore Ext.A1 shall enure the<\/p>\n
benefit of all family members including the appellant and<\/p>\n
therefore under Ext.A2 sale deed respondents 2 and 3 did not<\/p>\n
derive independent title and hence the courts below should have<\/p>\n
granted a preliminary decree dividing the property as it devolved<\/p>\n
on the legal heirs on the death of Chellappan Chettiar . Learned<\/p>\n
counsel also argued that in any case when appellant is found to<\/p>\n
be in possession of a portion of the building exclusively and the<\/p>\n
only case alleged by respondents 2 and 3 was that they were<\/p>\n
permitted by Chellappan Chettiar      to occupy, the occupation<\/p>\n
thereafter    cannot be tagged on after the right obtained by<\/p>\n
respondents 2 and 3 under Ext.A2 and if at all the remedy is only<\/p>\n
to seek a decree for recovery of possession and suit for<\/p>\n
mandatory injunction is not sustainable.\n<\/p>\n
     4. On hearing learned counsel appearing for appellant, I do<\/p>\n
not find any substantial question of law involved in the appeals.<\/p>\n
As far as Ext.A1 certificate of purchase whereunder the<\/p>\n
kudikidappu right was purchased by Chellappan Chettiar         is<\/p>\n
concerned, there is no evidence to prove that kudikidappu right<\/p>\n
purchased was not that of Chellappan Chettiar but that of the<\/p>\n
family. Courts below, on appreciation of evidence, found that it<\/p>\n
was Chellappan Chettiar who was the kudikidappukaran and<\/p>\n
under Ext.A1, the kudikidappu right was purchased by<\/p>\n
RSA 649 & 650\/07                 5<\/span><\/p>\n
Chellappan Chettiar . During the lifetime of Chellappan Chettiar<\/p>\n
himself, under Ext.A2 he transferred his rights in favour of<\/p>\n
respondents 2 and 3. In such circumstances, finding of courts<\/p>\n
below that Ext.A1 will not enure to the benefit of appellant or<\/p>\n
other legal heirs of Chellappan Chettiar, is correct and appellant<\/p>\n
is not entitled to claim a decree for partition, as if the property<\/p>\n
belonged to Chellappan Chettiar, when he died. It is more so<\/p>\n
when under Ext.A2, Chellappan Chettiar earlier transferred the<\/p>\n
property in favour of respondents 2 and 3. Therefore courts<\/p>\n
below rightly dismissed O.S.108 of 1986.\n<\/p>\n
     5.      The argument of learned counsel appearing for<\/p>\n
appellant is that as appellent is found to be in exclusive<\/p>\n
possession of a portion of the building, without seeking a decree<\/p>\n
for recovery of possession,      courts below should not have<\/p>\n
granted a decree for mandatory injunction. The argument is that<\/p>\n
what was contended by respondents 2 and 3 was that appellant<\/p>\n
was permitted by Chellappan Chettiar, the father to occupy it<\/p>\n
and if at all there was a permission, it cannot be tagged on with<\/p>\n
the title obtained by respondents 2 and 3 and therefore they<\/p>\n
should have filed a suit for recovery of possession.<\/p>\n
     6.   The appellant instituted O.S.108 of 1986 seeking a<\/p>\n
decree for partition of the entire property including the building<\/p>\n
for which a decree for recovery of possession was granted, on<\/p>\n
RSA 649 & 650\/07                 6<\/span><\/p>\n
the contention that she is in joint possession of the property<\/p>\n
along with respondents 2 and 3. There was no case that she was<\/p>\n
in exclusive possession of the property as is now canvassed.<\/p>\n
Therefore the legal position is that her possession can only be a<\/p>\n
permissive one as found by the courts below. If that be the case,<\/p>\n
the relief granted by courts below for mandatory injunction is<\/p>\n
perfectly legal and warrants no interference.<\/p>\n
     7. As no substantial question of law is involved in the<\/p>\n
appeals, appeals are dismissed. But in view of the fact that<\/p>\n
appellant has been residing in the building, she is granted three<\/p>\n
months time from today to surrender the vacant possession of<\/p>\n
the building.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                          M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE<\/p>\n
lgk\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Esakki Amma Saraswathy vs Thankamoni on 24 July, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RSA No. 649 of 2007() 1. ESAKKI AMMA SARASWATHY, AGED 61, … Petitioner Vs 1. THANKAMONI, D\/O.ESAKKI AMMA, AGED 48, … Respondent 2. OMANA, D\/O.ESAKKI AMMA, AGED 46 YEARS, 3. CHELLAPPAN CHETTIAR KRISHNAN CHETTIAR, 4. […]<\/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-46663","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nEsakki Amma Saraswathy vs Thankamoni on 24 July, 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\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Esakki Amma Saraswathy vs Thankamoni on 24 July, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-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=\"2007-07-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-12T01:11:16+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\\\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Esakki Amma Saraswathy vs Thankamoni on 24 July, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-07-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-12T01:11:16+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1224,\"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\\\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007\",\"name\":\"Esakki Amma Saraswathy vs Thankamoni on 24 July, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-07-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-12T01:11:16+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Esakki Amma Saraswathy vs Thankamoni on 24 July, 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":"Esakki Amma Saraswathy vs Thankamoni on 24 July, 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\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Esakki Amma Saraswathy vs Thankamoni on 24 July, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-07-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-12T01:11:16+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\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Esakki Amma Saraswathy vs Thankamoni on 24 July, 2007","datePublished":"2007-07-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-12T01:11:16+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007"},"wordCount":1224,"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\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007","name":"Esakki Amma Saraswathy vs Thankamoni on 24 July, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-07-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-12T01:11:16+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/esakki-amma-saraswathy-vs-thankamoni-on-24-july-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Esakki Amma Saraswathy vs Thankamoni on 24 July, 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\/46663","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=46663"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/46663\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=46663"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=46663"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=46663"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}