{"id":5820,"date":"2009-03-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009"},"modified":"2019-02-04T15:59:40","modified_gmt":"2019-02-04T10:29:40","slug":"c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"C.K. Chandran vs Advocate Thomas Unniyadan on 17 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
C.K. Chandran vs Advocate Thomas Unniyadan on 17 March, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCrl.MC.No. 819 of 2005()\n\n\n1. C.K. CHANDRAN, S\/O. CHAMPARA KOCHAKKAN,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. ADVOCATE THOMAS UNNIYADAN, M.L.A.,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.JOHN RALPH\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.S.SREEKUMAR\n\nThe Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI\n\n Dated :17\/03\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                       M.C. HARI RANI, J.\n\n              ======================\n\n                      CRL.M.C.NO. 819 of 2005\n\n             =======================\n\n            Dated this the 17th day of March 2009\n\n                             ORDER\n<\/pre>\n
      The petitioner in this petition is the sole accused in<\/p>\n
S.T.No.8009\/2004 pending before the Court of Judicial First Class<\/p>\n
Magistrate, Irinjalakuda and this petition is filed under Section<\/p>\n
482 of Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash Annexure-A1 complaint<\/p>\n
filed by the first respondent against him which was taken<\/p>\n
cognizance by the learned Magistrate and is pending before that<\/p>\n
court alleging commission of the offence under Sections 499, 500<\/p>\n
and 501 of I.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
      2. The statement of facts as alleged in this petition are as<\/p>\n
follows:- The petitioner is the political worker and the Area<\/p>\n
Committee Secretary of CPI(M)Irinjalakuda and also a member of<\/p>\n
Thrissur District Committee of C.P.I(M). He was implicated as the<\/p>\n
sole accused in S.T.No.8009\/2004 pending before the Judicial<\/p>\n
First Class Magistrate Court, Irinjalakuda which was taken on file<\/p>\n
CRMC.819\/2005                     -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
on the basis of a private complaint filed by the first respondent<\/p>\n
herein on 10-12-2004 alleging commission of the offence<\/p>\n
punishable under Sections 499, 500 and 501 of the Indian Penal<\/p>\n
Code. Copy of the complaint is produced as Annexure-A1. After<\/p>\n
the receipt of the complaint, the Magistrate recorded sworn<\/p>\n
statement     of the   first  respondent\/complainant      and   took<\/p>\n
cognizance of the offence punishable under Sections 500 and 501<\/p>\n
of the Indian Penal Code and issued process to the accused to<\/p>\n
appear on 23-4-2005 before that court. The petitioner\/accused<\/p>\n
approached this Court by filing this petition on 24-2-2005 with<\/p>\n
the prayer to quash Annexure-A1 complaint and also the<\/p>\n
proceedings against him in the above mentioned case.<\/p>\n
      3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner<\/p>\n
and the first respondent.\n<\/p>\n
      4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner<\/p>\n
that the petitioner and the first respondent are politically opposite<\/p>\n
parties.     The first respondent herein,who is the M.L.A.of<\/p>\n
Irinjalakuda constituency and a leader of Kerala Congress(M) has<\/p>\n
CRMC.819\/2005                 -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
alleged in Annexure-AI complaint that the petitioner conducted a<\/p>\n
press conference on 23-11-2004 at the Press Club, Irinjalakuda<\/p>\n
and stated as follows:\n<\/p>\n
      ” K.L.D.C.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
          . .  .       .”<\/p>\n
Annexure-II is produced along with this petition which is copy of<\/p>\n
the news item published in Kerala Kaumudi, Malayalam daily<\/p>\n
dated 24-11-2004, which according to the 1strespondent was<\/p>\n
published on the basis of the above statement made by the<\/p>\n
petitioner in the press conference. Annexure-A-III is also<\/p>\n
produced as the true copy of the news item in Mathrubhumi daily<\/p>\n
dated 26-11-2004. Annexure-A-IV is another copy of the news<\/p>\n
item published in Malayala Manorama daily dated 29-9-2004<\/p>\n
and Annexure-A-V is the true copy of the news item published in<\/p>\n
Deshabhimani daily dated 30-9-2004. Annexures A-II to A-V<\/p>\n
also contain the defamatory statements which were mentioned in<\/p>\n
Annexure-A1 complaint. According to the 1st respondent, in the<\/p>\n
press conference conducted by the petitioner on 23-11-2004 at<\/p>\n
CRMC.819\/2005                   -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
the Press Club, Irinjalakuda he had stated the above mentioned<\/p>\n
statements are incorrect, which according to the 1st respondent<\/p>\n
was defamatory and made with the intention to lower his<\/p>\n
reputation among the public.     Thus the petitioner herein    has<\/p>\n
committed offences under Sections 499, 500 and 501 of the<\/p>\n
Indian Penal Code.\n<\/p>\n
     5. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that<\/p>\n
there was political vengeance to the first respondent and due to<\/p>\n
that vengeance the present complaint has been filed by him<\/p>\n
without any bona fides against the petitioner and that the<\/p>\n
statements made by the petitioner in the press conference as<\/p>\n
narrated in Annexure-A1 complaint even take it as conceded, it<\/p>\n
is not defamatory as such and it should not have been taken<\/p>\n
cognizance by the learned Magistrate. It is also argued by the<\/p>\n
learned counsel for the petitioner that no sufficient allegations<\/p>\n
are there in the complaint to connect the petitioner herein to the<\/p>\n
alleged offence. The learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of<\/p>\n
the case without considering the facts and due to non-application<\/p>\n
CRMC.819\/2005                  -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
of  mind.      Therefore,  the   complainant\/1strespondent    has<\/p>\n
unnecessarily dragged the petitioner to face the criminal trial in<\/p>\n
S.T.No.8009\/2004 and Annexure-A1 complaint against the<\/p>\n
petitioner is an abuse of process of the court and is liable to be<\/p>\n
quashed.\n<\/p>\n
      6. The learned counsel for the first respondent has<\/p>\n
submitted that it is the admitted case of the petitioner that he<\/p>\n
made the above-mentioned statements in the press conference<\/p>\n
conducted by him on 23-11-2004 as mentioned in Annexure-A1<\/p>\n
complaint preferred by the first respondent herein. The learned<\/p>\n
Magistrate on receipt of Annexure-A1 complaint recorded the<\/p>\n
sworn statement of the complainant and took cognizance of the<\/p>\n
case as S.T.No.8009\/2004 and ordered to issue summons to the<\/p>\n
petitioner herein.    Whether the petitioner is entitled to get<\/p>\n
protection under any of the exceptions more particularly<\/p>\n
exceptions 1 to 3 of Section 499 of I.P.C. as argued by the<\/p>\n
learned counsel for the petitioner has to be decided by the<\/p>\n
learned Magistrate on the basis of evidence to be let in by the<\/p>\n
CRMC.819\/2005                   -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
parties at the time of trial. So no interference is required at this<\/p>\n
stage by invoking the jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., it<\/p>\n
is submitted.\n<\/p>\n
      7. Section 499 of I.P.C.reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n
     “499. Defamation,-whoever, by words either spoken or<\/p>\n
     intended to be read, or by signs or by visible<\/p>\n
     representations, makes or publishes any imputation<\/p>\n
     concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing<\/p>\n
     or having reason to believe that such imputation will<\/p>\n
     harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in<\/p>\n
     the cases hereinafter expected, to defame that<\/p>\n
     person”.\n<\/p>\n
     Exceptions 1 to 3 of Section 499 of I.P.C.read as follows:<\/p>\n
     First exception-Imputation of truth which public<\/p>\n
     good requires to be made or published,- It is not<\/p>\n
     defamation     to   impute   anything   which    is  true<\/p>\n
     concerning any person, if it be for the public good that<\/p>\n
     the imputation should be made or published. Whether<\/p>\n
CRMC.819\/2005                     -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
     or not it is for the public good is a question of fact.<\/p>\n
     Second Exception,- Public conduct of public<\/p>\n
     servants,- It is not defamation to express in a good<\/p>\n
     faith any opinion whatever respecting the conduct of<\/p>\n
     a public servant in the discharge of his public<\/p>\n
     functions, or respecting his character, so far as his<\/p>\n
     character appears in that conduct, and no further.<\/p>\n
     Third exception,-Conduct of any person touching<\/p>\n
     any public question,-It is not defamation to<\/p>\n
     express    in    good  faith    any   opinion  whatever<\/p>\n
     respecting the conduct of any person touching any<\/p>\n
     public question, and respecting his character, so far<\/p>\n
     as his character appears in that conduct, and no<\/p>\n
     further.\n<\/p>\n
    8. In the light of the provisions contained in Section 499 of<\/p>\n
the I.P.C. as above mentioned, the important aspect to be<\/p>\n
examined is whether the allegations in Annexure-A1 complaint,<\/p>\n
prima facie, makes out the offence of defamation against the<\/p>\n
CRMC.819\/2005                    -8-<\/span><\/p>\n
petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
      9. The allegations against the petitioner in Annexure-A1<\/p>\n
complaint is that he conducted a press conference on 23-11-2004<\/p>\n
at the Press Club, Irinjalakuda and stated as follows:<\/p>\n
      “K.L.D.C.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
          . . .       .”<\/p>\n
It is further alleged that this statement was published in Kerala<\/p>\n
Kaumudi Malayalam daily on 24-11-2004 under the caption<\/p>\n
     ”                       .        ..\n<\/p>\n
       . . .. .”\n<\/p>\n
      10. Identical news items had been published in other<\/p>\n
newspapers      like  Mathrubhumi     daily  dated    26-11-2004,<\/p>\n
Deshabhimani, Deepika etc.and the same were published<\/p>\n
pursuant to the statements made by the petitioner in the press<\/p>\n
conference.   Copies of the above mentioned news items were<\/p>\n
produced as Annexures-II to V along with this petition.<\/p>\n
      11. In order to attract the offence under Section 499 of<\/p>\n
I.P.C., the offender must intend to harm the reputation of the<\/p>\n
victim amongst public or must do the culpable act with the<\/p>\n
CRMC.819\/2005                    -9-<\/span><\/p>\n
contumacious knowledge and belief and that such harm would<\/p>\n
result the reputation of the aggrieved complainant.        All those<\/p>\n
matters can only be decided by the trial court on the basis of the<\/p>\n
evidence to be adduced on the prosecution side and evidence on<\/p>\n
the defence side if any. Whether the petitioner is entitled to get<\/p>\n
the protection of any of the exception of Section 499 as argued<\/p>\n
by the learned counsel for the petitioner can be decided by the<\/p>\n
learned Magistrate considering the evidence to be adduced by<\/p>\n
either side.     Whether the above statements mentioned in<\/p>\n
Annexure-A1 complaint has been made by the petitioner in good<\/p>\n
faith or in the interest of the public etc. can only be decided on<\/p>\n
the basis of the evidence to be let in by the parties.<\/p>\n
             12. In this petition filed by the petitioner before this<\/p>\n
Court, who is the sole accused in the above crime, I find no<\/p>\n
sufficient ground to invoke the jurisdiction of this court as<\/p>\n
envisaged under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. which can be exercised<\/p>\n
only sparingly and with abundant caution.                  In such<\/p>\n
circumstances, I find no reason to interfere with Annexure-A1<\/p>\n
CRMC.819\/2005                   -10-<\/span><\/p>\n
complaint which was already taken cognizance by the learned<\/p>\n
magistrate     and     is  pending     before     that   court   as<\/p>\n
S.T.No.8009\/2004.       Therefore, this petition is devoid of merits<\/p>\n
and is liable to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
     In the result, the Crl.M.C.is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                              Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
                                       M.C. HARI RANI
\n                                              JUDGE
\nks.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court C.K. Chandran vs Advocate Thomas Unniyadan on 17 March, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Crl.MC.No. 819 of 2005() 1. C.K. CHANDRAN, S\/O. CHAMPARA KOCHAKKAN, … Petitioner Vs 1. ADVOCATE THOMAS UNNIYADAN, M.L.A., … Respondent 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY For Petitioner :SRI.JOHN RALPH For Respondent :SRI.S.SREEKUMAR The […]<\/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-5820","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nC.K. Chandran vs Advocate Thomas Unniyadan on 17 March, 2009 - 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\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"C.K. Chandran vs Advocate Thomas Unniyadan on 17 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-03-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-02-04T10:29:40+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\\\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"C.K. Chandran vs Advocate Thomas Unniyadan on 17 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-04T10:29:40+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1532,\"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\\\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009\",\"name\":\"C.K. Chandran vs Advocate Thomas Unniyadan on 17 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-04T10:29:40+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"C.K. Chandran vs Advocate Thomas Unniyadan on 17 March, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"C.K. Chandran vs Advocate Thomas Unniyadan on 17 March, 2009 - 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\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"C.K. Chandran vs Advocate Thomas Unniyadan on 17 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-02-04T10:29:40+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\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"C.K. Chandran vs Advocate Thomas Unniyadan on 17 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-04T10:29:40+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009"},"wordCount":1532,"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\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009","name":"C.K. Chandran vs Advocate Thomas Unniyadan on 17 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-04T10:29:40+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-k-chandran-vs-advocate-thomas-unniyadan-on-17-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"C.K. Chandran vs Advocate Thomas Unniyadan on 17 March, 2009"}]},{"@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\/5820","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=5820"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5820\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5820"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5820"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5820"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}