{"id":5658,"date":"2002-02-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-02-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002"},"modified":"2017-03-08T00:47:48","modified_gmt":"2017-03-07T19:17:48","slug":"ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002","title":{"rendered":"M\/S.Jayalakshmi Weaving Works vs M.Sivasamy on 15 February, 2002"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M\/S.Jayalakshmi Weaving Works vs M.Sivasamy on 15 February, 2002<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS          \n DATED:   15-02-2002 \n CORAM   \n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.PACKIARAJ           \n\n Crl.R.C.No.1334 of 1998 and Crl.M.P.No.10222 of 1998 \n\n\n 1. M\/s.Jayalakshmi Weaving Works  \nrep. by its Managing Partner\nA.Damodaram   \nChirakkal, Kannur, Kerala State\n\n2. A Damodaran                                                  .. Petitioners.      \n\n\n                                        Versus \n\n M.Sivasamy                                                     .. Respondent.\n\n\n!               For Petitioners: Mr.P.Mani\n\nPRAYER in Crl.R.C.No.1334 of 1998: Revision against the order dated 2\n.11.98 passed in Crl.M.P.No.7750 of 1998 in C.A.No.8 of 1994 on the\nfile of the First Additional Sessions Judge and Chief Judicial\nMagistrate, Salem.\n\n:  O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n<p>        This revision has been filed by  the  petitioner  herein  against  the<br \/>\norder  passed  by  the  First  Additional  Sessions  Judge  cum Chief Judicial<br \/>\nMagistrate, Salem in Crl.M.P.No.7750 of 1998 in C.A.No.8 of 1994 against their<br \/>\nconviction for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.  At the outset, I may state that the judgment of  the  trial  Court<br \/>\nhas  not  been  filed  in  this  revision and hence, this Court is not able to<br \/>\nappreciate the contentions of the rival parties and the  discussions  made  by<br \/>\nthe trial Judge, while finding the accused guilty.  However for the purpose of<br \/>\ndisposing  of this revision, the learned counsel for the petitioners restricts<br \/>\nhimself only to the orders passed by the First Additional  Sessions  Judge  in<br \/>\nCrl.M.P.No.7750  of 1998 filed by the complainant\/respondent under Section 391<br \/>\nCr.P.C, praying for a permission to adduce additional evidence.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.  The facts of the prosecution as revealed in the complaint  indicates  that<br \/>\nthe  first  accused  is  a  firm  doing  business  of manufacturing High Class<br \/>\nHandloom piece goods and the second accused is the  Managing  Partner  of  the<br \/>\nfirm Jeyalakshmi  Weaving  Works  at  Chirakkal,  Cannanore.   The complainant<br \/>\nherein is a Yarn Merchant doing business in yarns and  clothes  of  which  the<br \/>\naccused is a customer and had purchased clothes on several occasions totalling<br \/>\nto rupees  two  lakhs  and  odd.    The  last date of the supply of the goods,<br \/>\naccording to the petitioners\/ accused was on 4.12.87, for which the accused is<br \/>\nsaid to have issued a cheque for Rs.50,000\/- dated 28.4.1991.  When  the  said<br \/>\ncheque  was  presented  in the bank, the same was dishonoured on the ground of<br \/>\ninsufficiency of funds and consequently proceedings under Section 138  of  the<br \/>\nNegotiable Instruments Act was initiated against the accused.\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.   The  petitioners\/accused herein took the plea that the goods were<br \/>\nsupplied to them  on  4.12.87,  while  the  cheque  was  dated  28.4.1991  and<br \/>\nconsequently,  the  cheque  having  been issued after three years, it does not<br \/>\ncome under the category of &#8220;legally enforceable debt&#8221;  as  contemplated  under<br \/>\nthe  explanation  under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as it is<br \/>\ntime barred.  But however, it appears that  the  learned  Magistrate  has  not<br \/>\naccepted his  plea  and  has  convicted  the  petitioners.  It is again at the<br \/>\nAppellate stage, the same stand had been taken by the petitioners  herein  and<br \/>\nconsequently  according  to  the  petitioners, they cannot be convicted for an<br \/>\noffence under Section 13 8 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.  It is  at  this<br \/>\njuncture that the respondent\/complainant herein had filed an application under<br \/>\nSection 391 Cr.P.C before the Appellate Court, stating that actually the total<br \/>\ndebt  of  the  accused  amounts  to  Rs.2,61,848\/-  and as a part payment, the<br \/>\npetitioners\/accused had given two  cheques  for  Rs.50,000\/-  dated  30.10.90,<br \/>\nwhich  is  within  three  years  from the last date of supply of the goods and<br \/>\nconsequently, the accused has acknowledged the existing  debt  and  hence  the<br \/>\nperiod of limitation would start only from 30.10 .90.  As a matter of fact the<br \/>\ncomplainant  would  also  place  on  record  that those cheques also have been<br \/>\ndishonoured and a prosecution under Section  138  was  initiated  against  the<br \/>\naccused in C.C.No.57 of 1991 and therefore the complainant (respondent herein)<br \/>\nwanted  to adduce evidence in relation to the issuance of those cheques, which<br \/>\nindicates the acknowledgment of the debt as on 30.10.90  within  a  period  of<br \/>\nthree  years  and  consequently,  the  present  prosecution  comes  within the<br \/>\nexplanation  in  Section  138  of  the  Negotiable  Instruments  Act  &#8220;legally<br \/>\nenforceable debt&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.   A  counter  was  filed  by  the  accused  herein stating that the<br \/>\npetition has been filed belatedly and the witnesses have been  cross  examined<br \/>\nat  length  even  during  the  course of trial before the Magistrate; that the<br \/>\nrespondent\/complainant herein had not let in any evidence to this  effect  and<br \/>\nconsequently petition  under Section 391 Cr.P.C has to be dismissed.  However,<br \/>\nthe learned Sessions Judge after going through the  records  had  allowed  the<br \/>\npetition.  It is against this order the present revision has been filed.\n<\/p>\n<p>        6.   Though  notice  has  been  sought to be served on the respondent\/<br \/>\ncomplainant, notice was not  served  and  the  matter  had  been  periodically<br \/>\nadjourned.   Hence  I  am  constrained  to  go  through  the records, hear the<br \/>\npetitioner and pass orders.\n<\/p>\n<p>                On a perusal of the records, I find that two cheques  have  in<br \/>\nfact  been  issued by the accused on 30.10.90 and according to the complainant<br \/>\nthose cheques are said to be as part payment of  this  existing  liability  or<br \/>\ndebt  and  consequently he had wanted to adduce evidence relating to the same.<br \/>\nIt is the further contention of the learned counsel that  these  cheques  were<br \/>\nalready in existence and that they were the subject matter of another case and<br \/>\nconsequently those records have not been brought on record in this case at the<br \/>\nrelevant time.    Since  I  feel  that  those  cheques are not created for the<br \/>\npurpose of this case and they were already  existing  at  the  time  when  the<br \/>\nprosecution  was  launched  in  relation to this case and the accused has till<br \/>\ndate not disputed about the factum of issuing such cheques in  favour  of  the<br \/>\ncomplainant,  I  do  not feel any illegality committed by the learned Sessions<br \/>\nJudge in allowing the petition filed by the respondent herein.  Therefore,  in<br \/>\nsuch  circumstances, I hold that this Court cannot say that the prosecution is<br \/>\nbeing allowed to fill in the lacunae.  But it  is  only  in  the  interest  of<br \/>\njustice  and  in  order  to  arrive  at  a  just decision, this Court finds it<br \/>\nnecessary that an opportunity should be given  to  the  respondent  to  adduce<br \/>\nadditional  evidence  and  also  permit  the  accused  to  cross  examine  the<br \/>\ncomplainant.  However, it is open for the  accused  to  take  any  defence  to<br \/>\ndiscredit  the  version of the prosecution and the Court is directed to decide<br \/>\non the evidence without being influenced by  any  observations  made  by  this<br \/>\nCourt.   In the result, this revision is dismissed with the direction that the<br \/>\nappeal should be disposed of as early as possible.    Consequently,  connected<br \/>\nCrl.M.P is closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                                15-02-2002 <\/p>\n<p>Index:Yes\/No<br \/>\ncsh <\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1. The Judicial Magistrate V<br \/>\nSalem.\n<\/p>\n<p>2. -Do- Thro The Chief Judicial<br \/>\nMagistrate, Salem.\n<\/p>\n<p>3. The Principal District Sessions<br \/>\nSessions Judge, Salem.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                        A.PACKIARAJ,J.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                Pre-Delivery Order in<br \/>\n                                                Crl.R.C.Nos.1334 of 1998 <\/p>\n<p>                                                                15-02-2002 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court M\/S.Jayalakshmi Weaving Works vs M.Sivasamy on 15 February, 2002 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 15-02-2002 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.PACKIARAJ Crl.R.C.No.1334 of 1998 and Crl.M.P.No.10222 of 1998 1. M\/s.Jayalakshmi Weaving Works rep. by its Managing Partner A.Damodaram Chirakkal, Kannur, Kerala State 2. A Damodaran .. Petitioners. Versus M.Sivasamy [&hellip;]<\/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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5658","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>M\/S.Jayalakshmi Weaving Works vs M.Sivasamy on 15 February, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S.Jayalakshmi Weaving Works vs M.Sivasamy on 15 February, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2002-02-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-03-07T19:17:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S.Jayalakshmi Weaving Works vs M.Sivasamy on 15 February, 2002\",\"datePublished\":\"2002-02-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-07T19:17:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002\"},\"wordCount\":1064,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S.Jayalakshmi Weaving Works vs M.Sivasamy on 15 February, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2002-02-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-07T19:17:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S.Jayalakshmi Weaving Works vs M.Sivasamy on 15 February, 2002\"}]},{\"@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":"M\/S.Jayalakshmi Weaving Works vs M.Sivasamy on 15 February, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S.Jayalakshmi Weaving Works vs M.Sivasamy on 15 February, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2002-02-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-03-07T19:17:48+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S.Jayalakshmi Weaving Works vs M.Sivasamy on 15 February, 2002","datePublished":"2002-02-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-07T19:17:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002"},"wordCount":1064,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002","name":"M\/S.Jayalakshmi Weaving Works vs M.Sivasamy on 15 February, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2002-02-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-07T19:17:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-jayalakshmi-weaving-works-vs-m-sivasamy-on-15-february-2002#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S.Jayalakshmi Weaving Works vs M.Sivasamy on 15 February, 2002"}]},{"@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\/5658","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=5658"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5658\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5658"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5658"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5658"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}