{"id":5841,"date":"2003-12-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-12-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003"},"modified":"2018-09-06T00:57:48","modified_gmt":"2018-09-05T19:27:48","slug":"r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003","title":{"rendered":"R. Kaaruppan vs Baljit Singh Sethi on 12 December, 2003"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">R. Kaaruppan vs Baljit Singh Sethi on 12 December, 2003<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDated: 12\/12\/2003\n\nCoram\n\nThe hon'ble Mr. Justice P. SATHASIVAM\n\nWrit Petition No. 36000 of 2003\nand\nW.P.M.P.No. 43716 of 2003\n\nR. Kaaruppan,\nNo.21, 2nd Street, Balaji Nagar,\nRoyapettah, Chennai-600 014. .. Petitioner.\n\n-Vs-\n\n1. Baljit Singh Sethi,\n   Secretary General,\n   The National Rifle Association of India,\n   Nehru Stadium, New Delhi-110 003.\n\n2. Sivanthi Adithyan,\n   Vice President of the National Rifle\n   Association, Nehru Stadium, New Delhi-110 003. .. Respondents.\n\n        Petition  filed  under  Article  226 of the Constitution of India, for\nissuance of a Writ of Mandamus, as stated therein.\n\nFor petitioner:- Mr.  R.  Kaaruppan,\n                Party in person.\n\nFor Respondents:- Mr.  P.S.  Raman.\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>        R.  Kaaruppan, petitioner in this Writ Petition, seeks to issue a Writ<br \/>\nof Mandamus, directing the respondents, Secretary General and  Vice-President,<br \/>\nThe  National  Rifle Association of India to accept his entry for the trap and<br \/>\nskeet events at the National clay pigeon shooting championship commencing from<br \/>\n10th December, 2003.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.  The case of the petitioner as set out in the  affidavit  filed  in<br \/>\nsupport of the writ petition is briefly stated hereunder:<br \/>\nThe petitioner had not only qualified to take part in the National Clay Target<br \/>\nShooting Championship last year, but only reached the 9th  National  rank  and<br \/>\nrose even further upto the 6th rank at the National level in the trap shooting<br \/>\nevent.   As  far  as  skeet  event  is concerned, he had qualified despite not<br \/>\nhaving been permitted to participate in the event for more than six  years  in<br \/>\n2002.   By  shooting a score of 89\/125 in an intensely competed match and rose<br \/>\nto the rank 9; hence he was entitled to participate in both the events.    The<br \/>\nrespondents as  usual did not intimate him about the fixtures.  Immediately on<br \/>\ncoming to know about the event, on 28-11-2002 he sent his entries for all  the<br \/>\nthree events.   When he contacted the State Shooting Federation to forward his<br \/>\nentries, he was informed that he should forward it directly  to  the  National<br \/>\nRifle Association.  He sent the same to the respondent by Courier along with a<br \/>\nletter dated  28th December, 200 3.  Though the respondents had been receiving<br \/>\nentries directly and they did so in the year 1998, thereafter they refused  to<br \/>\naccept his  request.    When the entry had been sent to the respondents, it is<br \/>\nnot open to them to deny him to participate in the events.  Only in  his  case<br \/>\nthe  respondents  are  raising objections; hence the present writ petition for<br \/>\nappropriate direction.\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.  Heard the petitioner appearing in person and Mr.  P.S.  Raman, who<br \/>\nwas taking notice on behalf of the respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.  Mr.   R.  Kaaruppan, after taking me through his qualification and<br \/>\nability in competing the events which started  from  10th  December,  2003  at<br \/>\nHyderabad, would contend that in the light of the attitude of the respondents,<br \/>\nnecessary direction may be issued to them for accepting his entry for the Trap<br \/>\nand Skeet  events  in the National Clay Pigeon shooting championship.  Even at<br \/>\nthe outset i.e., while considering the submissions made by the petitioner, Mr.<br \/>\nP.S.  Raman representing the respondents, would contend that the writ petition<br \/>\nagainst the National Rifle Association of India is not maintainable, for which<br \/>\nhe relied on a decision of the Supreme Court and various orders passed by this<br \/>\nCourt.  He also contended that the petitioner does not qualify to  participate<br \/>\nin the events as claimed.\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.   In the light of the objection regarding maintainability of a writ<br \/>\npetition against  the  National  Rifle  Association  of  India  which  is  the<br \/>\nrespondent  in  this  writ petition, I shall consider the question relating to<br \/>\nmaintainability at the foremost.  Since the judgement of the Supreme Court and<br \/>\nvarious decisions of this Court, to be referred hereinafter, are  between  the<br \/>\nvery same parties and directly on the point, I am of the view that there is no<br \/>\nneed to  refer other factual matrix, as argued by the petitioner.  Against the<br \/>\norder dated 22-12-1999 made in Writ Petition No.  542\/99, and dated  12-1-2000<br \/>\nin W.M.P.No.  258\/2000 in W.P.No.  542\/99 of this Court, the petitioner herein<br \/>\npreferred Special  Leave  to  appeal  (Civil)  No.   1072-1973\/2000 before the<br \/>\nSupreme Court of India.  The 1st respondent therein is the very same  National<br \/>\nRifle Association  of  India.    On 21-01-2000 upon heaqring the petitioner in<br \/>\nperson and learned counsel for the respondents-National Rifle  Association  of<br \/>\nIndia  and  another,  the  Honourable  Supreme  Court has passed the following<br \/>\norder:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We do not think that a writ petition would lie against the  first  respondent<br \/>\nand there is nothing in the writ petition which suggests that it would or even<br \/>\navers that  it  would.  Secondly, we do not think that it is for this Court to<br \/>\ninterfere in decisions as to who should or should not be a  representative  of<br \/>\nthe country in a sporting event&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>        Though Mr.  R.  Kaaruppan, petitioner himself enclosed a copy  of  the<br \/>\nSupreme  Court  order  in  his  typed-set  of appers (vide page 1), by heavily<br \/>\nrelying on a decision of the Division Bench of  this  Court  dated  22-12-1999<br \/>\nrendered in Writ   Petition  No.    542  of  1999  (V.S.    Sirpurkar  and  K.<br \/>\nGnanaprakasam, JJ), he contended that,  as  the  Division  Bench  has  granted<br \/>\nrelief,  particularly in his favour, by declaring that the petitioner would be<br \/>\nentitled to take part in the further National competition in the trap event in<br \/>\nwhich he had reached the minimum standards in the National Competitions, 1999,<br \/>\nthere is no need in going into the maintainability of the writ petition and no<br \/>\nimpediment would be caused in granting any relief as claimed by him.    It  is<br \/>\ntrue  that  in  the  said  writ  petition,  the  Division  Bench  accepted the<br \/>\npetitioner&#8217;s case to some extent on merits.  The Bench had no occasion  to  go<br \/>\ninto the  maintainability  of  the writ petition.  It is relevant to note that<br \/>\nagainst  the  very  same  judgment  of  the   Division   Bench   (in   W.P.No.<br \/>\n542\/1999)with  regard  to the disallowed portion, the petitioner has preferred<br \/>\nS.L.P (Civil) No.  1072-1073\/2000 before  the  Supreme  Court,  which  I  have<br \/>\nalready referred  to.    The  S.L.P.,  was  between  the same parties, and the<br \/>\norderupon the petition came to be passed at the admission stage.   In  such  a<br \/>\ncircumstance,  I  am  of the view that so long as the said order subsists, the<br \/>\npetitioner cannot get any relief against the  National  Rifle  Association  of<br \/>\nIndia by  filing a writ petition before this Court.  In the light of the order<br \/>\nof the Supreme Court dated 21-01-2000 in the said special leave to  appeal,  I<br \/>\nam  of  the  view  that the petitioner is not entitled to rely on the Division<br \/>\nBench decision of this Court dated 22-12-1999.\n<\/p>\n<p>        6.  It is also relevant to  refer  the  subsequent  decision  of  this<br \/>\nCourt.  In  Writ  Petition  No.    7975\/2001 filed by the very same petitioner<br \/>\nagainst the respondents, praying to issue a writ of declaration, declaring the<br \/>\nNational Clay Pigeon Shooting Championship  2001  to  be  held  by  the  first<br \/>\nrespondent or his agents from 9th April to 1 8th April at Bikaner in Rajasthan<br \/>\nas  null  and  void  and  issue  direction  to  the respondents to conduct the<br \/>\nchampionship afresh, P.  Shanmugam, J., after referring to  the  judgement  of<br \/>\nthe Supreme  Court in S.L.P.No.  1072-1073\/2000 dated 21-1-2000, dismissed the<br \/>\nsaid writ petition.    The  following  conclusion  of  the  learned  Judge  is<br \/>\nrelevant:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The  judgment  between  the  inter-se parties is binding on the petitioner as<br \/>\nwell as this Court.  The petitioner has not made out any case or  averred,  as<br \/>\nset  out  in the Supreme Court&#8217;s order that the writ petition will lie against<br \/>\nthe first respondent&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>        7.  It is also brought to my notice that the Division Bench consisting<br \/>\nof V.S.  Sirpurkar  and  F.M.  Ibrahim Kalifulla, JJ., in W.P.M.P.No.  3534 of<br \/>\n2003 and W.A.M.P.No.  543 of 2003 in W.P.No.  2042 5 of 1999 and W.A.No.   794<br \/>\nof  2002,  declined  to grant interim relief by order dated 4-2-2003, based on<br \/>\nthe observation of the apex Court.   It  is  seen  that  the  learned  counsel<br \/>\nappearing for National Rifle Association of India has brought to the notice of<br \/>\nthe  Division  Bench  the  order  passed  by  the  Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court dated<br \/>\n21-1-2000 in S.L.P.  No.  1072-1073\/2000.   It  is  further  seen  that  after<br \/>\nperusing  the  said  order,  they accepted the objection raised by the learned<br \/>\ncounsel for the National Rifle Association of India.\n<\/p>\n<p>        8.  It is also brought to my notice that the Hon&#8217;ble Chief Justice and<br \/>\nK.  Gnanaprakasam, J., while admitting Writ Petition  No.    8121\/2003,  after<br \/>\nreferring to the  order  of  the  Supreme Court in S.  L.P.No.  1072-1073\/2000<br \/>\ndated 21-01-2000, declined  to  grant  interim  relief.    However,  the  writ<br \/>\npetition  was  admitted  by  the said Vision Bench as far as third respondent,<br \/>\nnamely, Sports Authority of India, New Delhi is concerned in order  to  verify<br \/>\nwhether  they  got any role or control in the affairs of the first respondent,<br \/>\nnamely, National Rifle Association of India.\n<\/p>\n<p>        9.  It is also relevant to refer the latest order of another  Division<br \/>\nBench consisting of Mr.    M.    Karpagavinayagam and S.  Ashok Kumar, JJ., in<br \/>\nWrit Petition Nos.  20425\/99 and 8121\/2003, Writ  Appeal  No.    794\/2002  and<br \/>\nContempt Petition No.  368\/2003 dated 5-12-2003.  The said Vision Bench had an<br \/>\noccasion to consider maintainability of a writ petition against National Rifle<br \/>\nAssociation of India.  The Hon&#8217;ble Division Bench, after taking the assistance<br \/>\nof  the  learned  Advocate General and after hearing the petitioner in person,<br \/>\ncounsel  for  National  Rifle  Association  and  after  referring  to  various<br \/>\ndecisions  of  the  Hon&#8217;ble  Supreme  Court  as  well  as this Court and after<br \/>\nanalysing all the materials placed before them,  have  concluded  in  para  37<br \/>\nthus:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;37.  So, there is no difficulty in holding that the Chennai Rifle Club or the<br \/>\nNational  Rifle  Association  of  India  would  not be construed to be a State<br \/>\nwithin the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>        10.   In the light of the order of the apex Court dated 21-01-2000 and<br \/>\nthe subsequent orders of this Court,  referred  to  above,  I  hold  that  the<br \/>\nrespondent,  namely, National Rifle Association of India is not a State within<br \/>\nthe meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution and no direction in the form  of<br \/>\nmandamus be issued as claimed by the petitioner.  Though the petitioner, while<br \/>\narguing  the  case  on  9 -12-2003 and 10-12-2003, has promised to palce other<br \/>\njudgements\/ decisions in support of  his  claim  that  the  writ  petition  is<br \/>\nmaintainable  against  the  Rifle  Association  of India, till date he has not<br \/>\nfurnished any other material.  In the light of the binding decisions  referred<br \/>\nto  above,  I have no other option, except to dismiss the writ petition as not<br \/>\nmaintainable.  In view of the above conclusion, there is no need  to  go  into<br \/>\nthe merits of the claim made by the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>        11.  For all these reasons, the writ petition is dismissed.  No costs.<br \/>\nConsequently, W.P.M.P.No.  43716 of 2003 is closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>R.B.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index:  Yes<br \/>\nInternet:  Yes<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court R. Kaaruppan vs Baljit Singh Sethi on 12 December, 2003 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 12\/12\/2003 Coram The hon&#8217;ble Mr. Justice P. SATHASIVAM Writ Petition No. 36000 of 2003 and W.P.M.P.No. 43716 of 2003 R. Kaaruppan, No.21, 2nd Street, Balaji Nagar, Royapettah, Chennai-600 014. .. Petitioner. -Vs- 1. [&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-5841","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>R. Kaaruppan vs Baljit Singh Sethi on 12 December, 2003 - 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\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"R. Kaaruppan vs Baljit Singh Sethi on 12 December, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003\" \/>\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=\"2003-12-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-09-05T19:27:48+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"R. Kaaruppan vs Baljit Singh Sethi on 12 December, 2003\",\"datePublished\":\"2003-12-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-05T19:27:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003\"},\"wordCount\":1719,\"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\\\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003\",\"name\":\"R. Kaaruppan vs Baljit Singh Sethi on 12 December, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2003-12-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-05T19:27:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"R. Kaaruppan vs Baljit Singh Sethi on 12 December, 2003\"}]},{\"@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":"R. Kaaruppan vs Baljit Singh Sethi on 12 December, 2003 - 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\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"R. Kaaruppan vs Baljit Singh Sethi on 12 December, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2003-12-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-09-05T19:27:48+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"R. Kaaruppan vs Baljit Singh Sethi on 12 December, 2003","datePublished":"2003-12-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-05T19:27:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003"},"wordCount":1719,"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\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003","name":"R. Kaaruppan vs Baljit Singh Sethi on 12 December, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2003-12-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-05T19:27:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-kaaruppan-vs-baljit-singh-sethi-on-12-december-2003#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"R. Kaaruppan vs Baljit Singh Sethi on 12 December, 2003"}]},{"@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\/5841","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=5841"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5841\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5841"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5841"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5841"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}