{"id":55854,"date":"2010-06-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-06-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010"},"modified":"2016-10-23T23:16:07","modified_gmt":"2016-10-23T17:46:07","slug":"smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010","title":{"rendered":"Smt.Fathima Amanulla vs V.M.Sulaiman on 16 June, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Smt.Fathima Amanulla vs V.M.Sulaiman on 16 June, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nMACA.No. 323 of 2004()\n\n\n1. SMT.FATHIMA AMANULLA, W\/O. AMANULLA,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. V.M.SULAIMAN S\/O. MYTHEEN,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. P.K.ISMAIL, S\/O. KUTTY,\n\n3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.,\n\n4. N.K.NAZEER, NANANTHAN HOUSE,\n\n5. C.A.ALI S\/O. ABOOBACKER,\n\n6. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.CHANDY JOSEPH\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI\n\n Dated :16\/06\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n            A.K.BAHSEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.\n            =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=\n                 M.A.C.A. No. 323 of 2004\n            =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=\n           Dated this the 16th day of June, 2010\n\n                        JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
Barkath Ali, J.\n<\/p>\n
      In this appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles<\/p>\n
Act, the claimant in O.P. (MV) No.1926\/1994 of Motor<\/p>\n
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam challenges the<\/p>\n
judgment and award of the Tribunal dated July 17, 2001<\/p>\n
awarding a compensation of Rs.2,30,750\/-       for the loss<\/p>\n
caused to the claimant on account of the injuries sustained<\/p>\n
by her in a motor accident.\n<\/p>\n
      2. The facts leading to this appeal, in brief, are<\/p>\n
these:- The claimant was a lady, aged 43 at the time of the<\/p>\n
accident and used to earn Rs.4,000\/-       per month as a<\/p>\n
teacher, according to the claimant. On April 3, 1994 at 4<\/p>\n
p.m. the claimant was travelling in a car bearing<\/p>\n
registration No. KL-7C-4775 along Vytila – Aroor road. At<\/p>\n
that time a lorry bearing registration No. KRV 4662, driven<\/p>\n
by the second respondent, came at a high speed from the<\/p>\n
MACA 323\/2004                 2<\/span><\/p>\n
opposite direction dashed against the car in which the claimant<\/p>\n
was travelling. The claimant sustained serious injuries.<\/p>\n
According to her, the accident occurred due to the rash and<\/p>\n
negligent driving of the offending lorry       by the second<\/p>\n
respondent. First respondent as the owner, second respondent<\/p>\n
as the driver and third respondent as the insurer of the<\/p>\n
offending     lorry are jointly and severally liable to pay<\/p>\n
compensation to the claimant.         The claimant claimed a<\/p>\n
compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs<\/p>\n
      3. Respondents 1, 2, 4 and 5 remained absent and were<\/p>\n
set ex parte by the Tribunal. The third respondent, the insurer<\/p>\n
of the offending lorry, filed a written statement, admitting the<\/p>\n
policy and further contended that the accident occurred due to<\/p>\n
the negligence of the driver of the car. The sixth respondent,<\/p>\n
insurer of the car in which the claimant was travelling, filed<\/p>\n
written statement admitting the policy and further contended<\/p>\n
that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the part of<\/p>\n
the driver of the lorry.\n<\/p>\n
      4. PWs.1 to 5 were examined and and Exts.A1 to A14<\/p>\n
MACA 323\/2004                3<\/span><\/p>\n
were marked on the side of the claimant before the Tribunal.<\/p>\n
Ext.B1 was marked on the side of the respondents. The Tribunal,<\/p>\n
on an appreciation of evidence, awarded a compensation of<\/p>\n
Rs.2,30,750\/-.   The claimant has now come up in appeal<\/p>\n
challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the<\/p>\n
Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n
       5. Heard the counsel for the claimant and the counsel for<\/p>\n
third respondent Insurance Company.\n<\/p>\n
       6. The accident is not disputed.     The finding of the<\/p>\n
Tribunal that the accident occurred due to the negligence on the<\/p>\n
part of the second respondent, driver of the offending lorry, is<\/p>\n
not challenged in this appeal.    Therefore, the only question<\/p>\n
which arises for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled<\/p>\n
to any enhanced compensation ?\n<\/p>\n
       7. The claimant sustained the following injuries as<\/p>\n
revealed from Exts.A5 discharge card and A14              wound<\/p>\n
certificate:-\n<\/p>\n
       “1) Lacerated wound rt. Upper eyelid 5 x 2 x 2 cm.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
       2) Incised wound rt. cheek 5 x 2 cm. Vertically.<\/p>\n
MACA 323\/2004                  4<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
      3) Multiple small incised wounds over the   posterior
\n          aspect of the rt. Elbow.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      4)   Multiple abrasions rt. upper arm rt. forearm,
\n          chin.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      5) Swelling and deformity rt. Thigh.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
      6)    Patient is unconscious Rt. pupil dialated and
\n          fixed.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      7) Severe head injury.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      8) Brain stem injury and diffused brain injury.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
C.T. Scan showed pin-point haemorrhage in the brain stem and<\/p>\n
another pin-point haemorrhage frontal region with severe brain<\/p>\n
ox oedema with squashing of cistern.She was laid up in the<\/p>\n
hospital for 111 days.\n<\/p>\n
     8. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of<\/p>\n
Rs.2,30,750\/-. Break up of the compensation awarded is as<\/p>\n
under :-\n<\/p>\n
     Transportation expense       :   Rs.   1,500\/-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Bystander's expense          :   Rs. 11,000\/-\n     Extra-nourishment            :   Rs.   5,000\/-\n     Damage to clothing           :   Rs.     500\/-\n     Treatment expenses           :   Rs. 87,705\n     Pain and sufferings          :   Rs. 35,000\/-\n     Neurological disability      :   Rs. 25,000\/-\n\nMACA 323\/2004                  5<\/span>\n\n     Physical disability            :    Rs. 10,000\/-\n     Disability caused              :    Rs. 35,000\/-\n     difficulties, discomfort and   :    Rs. 20,000\/-\n     other inconveniences\n     in the enjoyment other\n     normal life.\n                                         --------------------\n           Total                         Rs.230,705\/-\n           Rounded to               :    Rs.2,30,750\/-\n                                         ========\n\n<\/pre>\n
      9. The learned counsel for appellant sought enhancement<\/p>\n
of compensation for the disability caused, loss of amenities and<\/p>\n
enjoyment in life and pain and suffering endured. He has also<\/p>\n
pointed out that no compensation was awarded for future<\/p>\n
treatment expenses.\n<\/p>\n
      10. The Tribunal awarded Rs.25,000\/- for neurological<\/p>\n
disability, Rs.10,000\/- for physical disability and Rs.35,000\/- for<\/p>\n
disability caused to the right hand. The claimant was aged 43<\/p>\n
and was earning more than Rs.4,000\/-, as revealed from Ext.A13<\/p>\n
employment certificate. Therefore, we feel that her monthly<\/p>\n
income can reasonably be fixed at Rs.3,000\/-. Proper multiplier<\/p>\n
that can be taken is 14.\n<\/p>\n
      11. Ext.A3 is the treatment certificate and Ext. A8 is the<\/p>\n
MACA 323\/2004                  6<\/span><\/p>\n
certificate of disability issued by PW3 doctor. It shows that the<\/p>\n
claimant sustained head injury, brain stem injury and fracture of<\/p>\n
femur. He testified that her memory was not normal and that<\/p>\n
she was not able to manage financial matters and giving tuition<\/p>\n
to children and she has lost capacity to take decisions.<\/p>\n
Therefore, the disability assessed by him at 15% appears to be<\/p>\n
reasonable. That being so, for the neurological disability caused,<\/p>\n
the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs. 75,600\/-<\/p>\n
(Rs.3,000\/- x 12 x 14 x 15%). Thus, on this count the claimant is<\/p>\n
entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.50,600\/-.<\/p>\n
       12. Ext.A9 is the certificate of physical disability, which<\/p>\n
showed that the claimant was having shortening of right lower<\/p>\n
limb by 3 c.ms., wasting of right leg by 1 c.m., right thigh by 2<\/p>\n
cms. She was limping on the right side and the patient was<\/p>\n
using surgical foot wear for correction of shortening of height.<\/p>\n
The doctor assessed her physical disability as 12%, which<\/p>\n
appears to be reasonable.       Thus, for the physical disability<\/p>\n
caused, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of<\/p>\n
Rs.60,480\/-. (Rs.3,000\/- x 12 x 14 x 12%). Thus, on this count,<\/p>\n
MACA 323\/2004                   7<\/span><\/p>\n
the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of<\/p>\n
Rs.50,480\/-.\n<\/p>\n
       13. Ext.A4 is the disability certificate issued by PW5<\/p>\n
doctor, regarding the disability caused to her right eye. PW4<\/p>\n
testified and also certified in Et.A4 thus:-<\/p>\n
       “On opthalmological evaluation the patient had<\/p>\n
       alternate convergent squint and hemianopia. The<\/p>\n
       patient was reviewed on 11.06.’98 and she still had<\/p>\n
       alternate divergent squint with right homonymous<\/p>\n
       hemianopia. Because of this hemianopia the patient is<\/p>\n
       highly incapacitated to do her routine work and she<\/p>\n
       may be considered as having disability to the extent<\/p>\n
       of 30 percent due to her opthalmic problems.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
The percentage of disability assessed by PW3 was 30% appears<\/p>\n
to be reasonable. Thus, for the ophthalmological disability<\/p>\n
caused to her on account of the injuries sustained to her right<\/p>\n
eye, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,51,200\/-<\/p>\n
(Rs.3,000\/- x 12 x 14 x 30%). Thus, on this count, the claimant is<\/p>\n
entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,16,200\/-.<\/p>\n
MACA 323\/2004                  8<\/span><\/p>\n
      14. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of R.35,000\/- for<\/p>\n
pain and suffering. Taking into account the nature of the injuries<\/p>\n
sustained by the claimant, we feel that a compensation of<\/p>\n
Rs.50,000\/- would be reasonable for pain and suffering. Thus, on<\/p>\n
this count, the claimant is entitled to an additional compensation<\/p>\n
of Rs.15,000\/-.\n<\/p>\n
      15. For the loss of amenities and enjoyment in life,<\/p>\n
Rs.20,000\/- was awarded by the Tribunal. Taking into<\/p>\n
consideration the serious nature of the injuries sustained by the<\/p>\n
claimant, we feel that Rs.30,000\/- would be reasonable on this<\/p>\n
count. Therefore, on this count, the claimant is entitled to an<\/p>\n
additional compensation of Rs.10,000\/-.<\/p>\n
       16. There is another aspect in this case. No compensation<\/p>\n
was awarded for future treatment expenses. The nature of the<\/p>\n
injuries sustained by the claimant and the disabilities caused to<\/p>\n
her clearly shows that she has to spent considerable amount for<\/p>\n
future treatment. Therefore, we feel that a compensation of<\/p>\n
Rs.50,000\/- would be reasonable for future treatment expenses.<\/p>\n
As regards the compensation awarded under other heads, we<\/p>\n
MACA 323\/2004                 9<\/span><\/p>\n
find the same to be reasonable and therefore, are not disturbing<\/p>\n
the same.\n<\/p>\n
      17. In the result, the claimant is found entitled to an<\/p>\n
additional compensation of Rs.2,92,280\/-. She is      entitled to<\/p>\n
interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization<\/p>\n
and proportionate cost. The third respondent being the insurer<\/p>\n
of the offending lorry shall deposit the amount before the<\/p>\n
Tribunal within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of<\/p>\n
this judgment with notice to the claimant.    The award of the<\/p>\n
Tribunal is modified to the above extent.\n<\/p>\n
      The appeal is disposed of as found above.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                       A.K. BASHEER,
\n                                       JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
                                       P.Q.BARKATH ALI,
\n                                       JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
mn.\n<\/p>\n
MACA 323\/2004    10\n\n                   A.K.BAHSEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ.\n                  =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=\n                     M.A.C.A. No. 323 of 2004\n                  =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=\n\n\n\n\n                             JUDGMENT\n                        16th day of June, 2010\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Smt.Fathima Amanulla vs V.M.Sulaiman on 16 June, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM MACA.No. 323 of 2004() 1. SMT.FATHIMA AMANULLA, W\/O. AMANULLA, … Petitioner Vs 1. V.M.SULAIMAN S\/O. MYTHEEN, … Respondent 2. P.K.ISMAIL, S\/O. KUTTY, 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., 4. N.K.NAZEER, NANANTHAN HOUSE, 5. C.A.ALI S\/O. ABOOBACKER, 6. […]<\/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-55854","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSmt.Fathima Amanulla vs V.M.Sulaiman on 16 June, 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\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Smt.Fathima Amanulla vs V.M.Sulaiman on 16 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-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=\"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-10-23T17:46:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Smt.Fathima Amanulla vs V.M.Sulaiman on 16 June, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-23T17:46:07+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1342,\"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\\\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010\",\"name\":\"Smt.Fathima Amanulla vs V.M.Sulaiman on 16 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-23T17:46:07+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Smt.Fathima Amanulla vs V.M.Sulaiman on 16 June, 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":"Smt.Fathima Amanulla vs V.M.Sulaiman on 16 June, 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\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Smt.Fathima Amanulla vs V.M.Sulaiman on 16 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-10-23T17:46:07+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Smt.Fathima Amanulla vs V.M.Sulaiman on 16 June, 2010","datePublished":"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-23T17:46:07+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010"},"wordCount":1342,"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\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010","name":"Smt.Fathima Amanulla vs V.M.Sulaiman on 16 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-23T17:46:07+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-amanulla-vs-v-m-sulaiman-on-16-june-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Smt.Fathima Amanulla vs V.M.Sulaiman on 16 June, 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\/55854","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=55854"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/55854\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=55854"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=55854"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=55854"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}