{"id":5226,"date":"2010-09-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010"},"modified":"2014-10-05T05:55:00","modified_gmt":"2014-10-05T00:25:00","slug":"d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"D V Balan vs M Gopala Reddy on 23 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
D V Balan vs M Gopala Reddy on 23 September, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: Ravi Malimath<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT  .\nDATED THIS THE 23\"' DAY; K V'\nTHE HON'BLVFEi'  TTALIMATH\n\nREGULAR F1;:e...s..T AP;>:=,A.1_.  OF 2005\n\nBETWEE;-ff\ufb01 .-  '\n\nSri   _ A -.\nAged1about\"7.1 y_e'a.rs;  . _'\nS\/0 late \"\\\/aidya n.a~tha _I_}'\/er' \" \n\nR\/o Door 'No.14-., * '\n\"Vrishabh'a_Vdri\", _  \n4\"';C--ro_ss, BD.\/{Main Road,\nNafajareddy Co\"i0ny.__._. v\n\nA  .Ba'ngaf\u00a7;r\u00a7\u00a7A~:_.560 017. ...APPELLANT\n\n for M\/s. Vagdevi Associates,\n\".Ad\\Jocate{sj} \n\n \n\n  \n\nA    Esri M.Gopala Reddy\n\nAged about 47 years,\nS\/0 fate R.M.Reddy,\nSinganayakanahafli,\nYefahanka Hobfi,\nBangalore North Tafuk,\n\n\n\nBangalore - 560 063.\n\n2. Sri N.Munireddy W\n\nS\/o Narasimha Reddy   -_ is   .\nAged about 36 years,  :.An'1enided'a_s'per  A\nNo.192, Opposite  'eorder d--a_te.d A ~ \nssssveerbhadreshwara Te.ri1pie,  23.6.20'U8V' '  0'\nKodlhalli,  \" i   \n\nBangalore --- 560 oos.      \n.  _ 'g':--....\"R~ESPONDEN.T'S\n\n(By M\/s. Kumar and Kun\ufb01ar,' 0'   _  ~ _\nSri S.V.Giridhar 8; Smt.Pr.athima i:|ol\"1nap~.j;ra--;\nAdvocates for:.C,\/R_V--'\u00a7._, M:\/s.Gi_ri.:dh4a'r.,8;.,_Co.\"Advocate for R-2)\n\n\"**aV7\n\nThis\"--RF';\u00a2\\ fined Lmder Section 96 CPC against the\nJudgment am  Decree, dated 1.2.2005 passed In\nO.S.N0';A8212i2OO2\"-on_tiae\"file of the XIV Addl.City Civil\nEudge, Bangpalore'---(CCH.__ No\".28), decreeing the suit for\npossessions'-and ma_nciatorfy injunction.\n\n  Tih*is\"R\u00e9FA cofr\ufb01lnfg on for hearing this day, the Court\n\n' de-iiyered.pthefoliowing:-\n\nJUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
 as  Aggrieved by the Judgment St decree dated 1-2-2005<\/p>\n
“passed by the XIV Additional City Civil 3udge, Bangalore<\/p>\n
ii 2′ ‘*’:(CCl-I No.28) in O.S.No.8212\/2002 decreeing the suit of<\/p>\n
the plaintiff, the defendant has filed the present appeal.<\/p>\n
7%<\/p>\n
South as described in the ‘E5’ schedule property…_”4’An’__’_e’Xtent<\/p>\n
of 30 feet, East to West and 40 feet, North-._:to <\/p>\n
made out in ‘C’ schedule property” Was’ <\/p>\n
continued under the ownership  grand.’afath’erf<\/p>\n
plaintiff. That the suit sched’ei:.l:’e-.prope’rty towards’
\nthe East was conveyeCl~.__in  defenfdainlt. Inspite
\nof this, the defendantfffatterriiptfed  a construction
\nover the suit scjheduiiefwf by the
\naction of   suit is flied seeking for<\/p>\n
a devcree.fAdfi’r’ec.tih.g defendant to deliver vacant
\npossession’ ofthe”~si,:i_t”schfedule property, for mandatory<\/p>\n
injunction clii~.,\u00a2,C_ti’n”g thedefendant to demolish the pillars<\/p>\n
  up”f:’o\\re~ry_._the  schedule property, for a permanent<\/p>\n
revstiraining the defendant from altering the<\/p>\n
na’t.ure__of  schedule property and consequential reliefs.<\/p>\n
 3. The defendant entered appearance and denied<\/p>\n
 suit of the plaintiff and contended that the suit is<\/p>\n
barred by time. He contends that the suit schedule<\/p>\n
>4\/W<\/p>\n
4. The trial Court on framing six  <\/p>\n
suit of the plaintiff by holding__th_at h–e””is’i:’entitledV for” <\/p>\n
possession of the suit ‘C’ schedule pjroperty._’s’u:bje:c’t:”it~0.the<\/p>\n
right of his co-owners, directed the..d’efend’ant_’ta…reh’1ove~.l’<\/p>\n
the constructions put up in the-..:piai__nt  rrscihiedtlle and to
\nhand over possession?’ of”._jtl21_e.”s–ah1:e’\u00bb_to the pfaintiff.
\nAggrieved by the sanfle-,~the p’res,ent’_ap:p’.eaI is filed by the<\/p>\n
defendant
\n y .’ counsel appearing for the
\ndefendant4contend’s..’Ath’a’t–.the Judgment & decree is bad in<\/p>\n
law\u00e9gandhyliabie\u00bb tobe set aside. He contends that by virtue<\/p>\n
of”‘l”theE”RfretjisteredWsale deed dated 16~8~1969 he had<\/p>\n
  ‘A’ schedule property vide Ex.P-8. Ex.P~8<\/p>\n
would _d’isc,lose that the extent of the property measures<\/p>\n
 115 fleetilx 40 feet; is up–to the land of Erappa. Therefore,<\/p>\n
A’ –..he\u00bbcuontends that if the land is to be reckoned up–to the<\/p>\n
 ..,.land of Erappa, the suit of the plaintiff would have to be<\/p>\n
rejected. During the pendency of the trial, a<\/p>\n
ta\/(M-~<\/p>\n
\/<\/p>\n
Commissioner was appointed to measure the.sch\u00e9.dj’u–l:Aei”v:’\\.,’i3.\u00bb<\/p>\n
and C properties. The report of the yco’rr.lr\u00a75;;:.sionyer <\/p>\n
been marked as Ex.P–13. The:’\u00bb.rep:=;>rt..:’wou_ld~ <\/p>\n
so far as the ‘A’ schedzilesproperty Visi”V:co~nc\u00aberneid the<\/p>\n
measurements were   Th’e\u00ab–.f_:meAa5surements
\nmatched one anothe’r;:–..at’   ayr\u00e9forget. So far as the
\nland retained by the  namely the ‘B’
\nschedule  the  an extent of 81
\nfeet X    Commissioner indicates
\nthat  {property was to an extent of
\nonly  feet’.  report of the Commissioner<\/p>\n
indicates that\u00bb..tAhe “C’.’sch’edule property measures 34.7 feet<\/p>\n
  x feet whpereaswthe claim of the plaintiff is to an extent<\/p>\n
55,30   feet. The Commissioner was examined<\/p>\n
with regard)’ to his report. Nothing worthwhile has been<\/p>\n
eIicite.d,_.ih the cross–examination of the Commissioner to<\/p>\n
“‘:V’_’d~:s_be.Iieve the report. However, the trial Court having<\/p>\n
 Partly accepted the report of the Commissioner came to<\/p>\n
 the conclusion that the plaintiff would be entitled to an<\/p>\n
yr<\/p>\n
\/’ .\n<\/p>\n
continued to remain with the plaintiff was to__a’n’\u00ab’extent;_.Vowf<\/p>\n
30 feet 40 feet as disclosed in ‘C’ schedu!se.,.p’i’=ope[rty. <\/p>\n
finding recorded by the trial Court:i.sy’zij:1faccordanceuAwitlli<\/p>\n
the facts and does not call-.__.for  interfere’n_ce.’T; “Thea?<\/p>\n
reliance placed by the trial ‘VuCZou’rt_VVonV”ti1eVV:respective sale
\ndeeds to establish  \u00a21sp’reta’\u00bbi}ma bythej plaintiff in
\nterms of ‘C” schedule… the material
\nand eviden_ca    for interference.\n<\/p>\n
 :1 _c_ounsel for the defendant
\nconten’ds4’that the ‘A’ schedule property by<\/p>\n
virtue of a’Vregi’s’tere.d sale deed vide Ex.P–8. Ex.P–8 would<\/p>\n
  that thefsalid property purchased by him was to an<\/p>\n
I   x 40 feet. However, an extent of 155 feet<\/p>\n
the  has been shown in the schedule by stating<\/p>\n
nthat exists up-to Erappa’s land. Therefore, it is<\/p>\n
“‘A.V_”c.o.ntended that the extent of land purchased by the<\/p>\n
 defendant should be read as an extent up-to the land of<\/p>\n
Erappa.\n<\/p>\n
-11-<\/span><\/p>\n
seeking for a decree of permanent injunction agai’nst.._lthve<\/p>\n
present plaintiff. Even though the written <\/p>\n
filed by the plaintiff herein, he did not c:oVntVestj,\u00bbtVhe.i’_suit,_<\/p>\n
Accordingly, the suit came to he :d_’ec’reed.<\/p>\n
plaintiff herein restraining llilirn-…from”‘interf\u00e9lri_ng_;”wi.th; the’-I’<\/p>\n
enjoyment of the suit scheduVle…p:ro.perty (.S’cheduVl,c3 I and II
\nof the suit property)”The.de.ci”e\u00e9–V.,,’?’\u20acIa;.nst the plaintiff
\nherein was r4e_iatab|e””‘to’titheA._fsc’he.duiglle”Iitem No.2 in<\/p>\n
O.S.No.11;G8’,f,I\u00a7:9,.3._  Xi.’hejvvsuitWyvas decreed to an<\/p>\n
extent of_1_Ai0lvlf~ee,tVx40,:feet.. A reading of the Judgment &
\ndecree tiie4re,in’vir.o’u~ld  that the decree was only to an<\/p>\n
extent of iiv0_’feet  feet. The entitlement of the<\/p>\n
 dejfendaaintTherein  virtue of Ex.P-8 the registered sale<\/p>\n
I  ‘deed,  extent of 3.55 feet x 40 feet. This is the<\/p>\n
‘A'”~sched’ullA\u00e9’ property. It is not in dispute. Therefore, the<\/p>\n
 said Iudgment & decree would not come to the aid of the<\/p>\n
\u00e9W_de–feindant herein. Even otherwise, the said Judgment &<\/p>\n
 V\u00bb ….decree is to an extent of granting injunction against the<\/p>\n
defendant so far as an extent of 110 feet x 40 feet is<\/p>\n
W<\/p>\n
….12….\n<\/p>\n
concerned. In the present suit the plaintiff seek$….fC.t’..t__\ufb01’\u00e9<\/p>\n
possession of the suit schedule ‘C’ propertyd\ufb01affhfe l.4’_C’fWf<\/p>\n
schedule property herein was not the su.bjeji:t”maytte:r”in._the__\ufb01r<\/p>\n
earlier suit. This is the prope.rty_. thathas remained: aft.er’~ V<\/p>\n
selling part of the ‘A’ scheduuilevfyv’propefrtygi’V’ Therefore
\nnotwithstanding the thelxplaintiff
\nherein, the present suit,h.e’i_ngsuiti,,:foA:\u00a7I’._’possession, the
\nsaid  not come to<\/p>\n
the aid of th:e…d\u00e9fe-‘ndafrit iiitniianyainanser.<\/p>\n
10.’W,_Theftvri\u00abaij.’A’Cou.rt”‘came to the conclusion that<\/p>\n
theregis no ma-teriai and evidence on record to show that<\/p>\n
 bvarrted bymlimitation. Hence it held that the suit<\/p>\n
 w_ith:n’i*i.rnitati,’on. In the absence of any material to the<\/p>\n
contar.ary_’,’ ‘me*rely setting up a plea that the suit is barred<\/p>\n
 L.”b:yVulimi.ta’t;i0n would not be sufficient. The defendant would<\/p>\n
._”h_ave’\u00abto establish on facts or on law by material to be<\/p>\n
 -\u00bb-piroduced that the suit is barred by limitation. Hence, in<\/p>\n
the absence of any material and in view of the facts and<\/p>\n
rte<\/p>\n
-13-<\/span><\/p>\n
circumstances of the case involved, the suit \ufb01’l$’d.VViVS’.:’\\F.\u00a5l!thln<\/p>\n
the period of limitation.\n<\/p>\n
13.. The plea of adverse1’possession_grai\u00bbsed’V<\/p>\n
defendant was negatived by C–o._i;_irt. _”‘_:Ita’CVan’ie’V’to the
\nconclusion that in order tol”pIesa’d’uadyers’e”poss\u00a7ession the
\ntitle of the plaintiff ii\\’zor.;’l’Vd”ii\u00e9.a’v;e .b.eV”a_dmitted and the
\nperiod in   would have to<\/p>\n
be shown:  of it has been shown.\n<\/p>\n
Hence, _  *of”‘*\u00ab..adverse possession has merely
\nremained’ a p’lea’virAith_ou_t”‘a’ny material. Therefore, Ifind no<\/p>\n
error cocomhlmittedl’  the trial Court in holding the issue<\/p>\n
 ” i_a’\u00a7.ain~sft t:he_.defen’d’a\u00e9nt.\n<\/p>\n
”    th’e:’–1aforesaid reasons, the appeal being devoid of<\/p>\n
ra<2_erit_s is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
Sd\/E:\n<\/p>\n
Judge<\/p>\n
Rsk\/–<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court D V Balan vs M Gopala Reddy on 23 September, 2010 Author: Ravi Malimath IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT . DATED THIS THE 23″‘ DAY; K V’ THE HON’BLVFEi’ TTALIMATH REGULAR F1;:e…s..T AP;>:=,A.1_. OF 2005 BETWEE;-ff\ufb01 .- ‘ Sri _ A -. Aged1about”7.1 y_e’a.rs; . _’ S\/0 late “\\\/aidya n.a~tha […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5226","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nD V Balan vs M Gopala Reddy on 23 September, 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\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"D V Balan vs M Gopala Reddy on 23 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-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=\"2010-09-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-10-05T00:25:00+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\\\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"D V Balan vs M Gopala Reddy on 23 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-10-05T00:25:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1287,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010\",\"name\":\"D V Balan vs M Gopala Reddy on 23 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-10-05T00:25:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"D V Balan vs M Gopala Reddy on 23 September, 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":"D V Balan vs M Gopala Reddy on 23 September, 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\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"D V Balan vs M Gopala Reddy on 23 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-10-05T00:25:00+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\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"D V Balan vs M Gopala Reddy on 23 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-10-05T00:25:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010"},"wordCount":1287,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010","name":"D V Balan vs M Gopala Reddy on 23 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-10-05T00:25:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-v-balan-vs-m-gopala-reddy-on-23-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"D V Balan vs M Gopala Reddy on 23 September, 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\/5226","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=5226"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5226\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5226"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5226"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5226"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}