{"id":58690,"date":"2008-12-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008"},"modified":"2016-01-07T15:57:50","modified_gmt":"2016-01-07T10:27:50","slug":"savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008","title":{"rendered":"Savithri vs J Santhosh Babu on 1 December, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Savithri vs J Santhosh Babu on 1 December, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A.S.Pachhapure<\/div>\n<pre>IN THE RISE CQURT OF KARNATRKA A? BANGALGRE\nDATED THZ$ $33 1\" DAY 99 DECEMBER, 2\u00a7Q8\n\nBEFCRE:\n\nTHE HGN'BLE MR. JUSTZCE A.s. \u00a7AcaaAg$RE[g[:f '\n\nCQZMZNAL APPEAL N0.13\u00e91 Q5 ge3:fj ' \n\nBETWEEN:\n\nSavithri,\n\nWfo. Chandra,\n\nMajcz,\n\nRfat No.K--70, 5\" Cross,\n\nLeft Side Magadi Road;_\" . :_v\":' '2\n\naanga1ore\u00bb56e 823. *'T- *_f . ';;,V=_AppaLLAN?X$\n{By Sri. Mohandas She\u00e9tyg \ufb02dV,j_ Ia\n\nJ.San:ho5h'Babu,x'  \u00bb  .\nSfo. iate R.Jalaka\ufb01tagNaidu,\nMajcr,j\" \"\n\n,*a{at_\u00a7\u00a2.3320;4, &amp;\" Cross,\n'_6\"'Mai\ufb01 %\u00a7ad; R.P.C.Lay@ut,\n\nVi\ufb01ayanag\u00a7r3V  .\nBangaioi@fE\u00a7GVC\u00e90. ... RESPONBENTXS\n\n[By Sri.\u00bbM,K;Venkataramana, Adv.}\n\n-ir'~k\"\u00a7c'\n\n V f\ufb01is Crl. Appeal i3 filed uXSection 378{4} of\n\n_x _G:I?{C\u00a3 against the Judgment \u00e9t. 31.08.2091 \u00a7as5ed\n\n~._5y ithe XVI Addl. CMM, Bangalore, in C.C.\n\n..  Ne\u00bb3\u00e9432\/2000 acquitting tha respondentfaccused for\n'*, 'the offence under Sectian 338 of N.I. \ufb01at.\n\nThis Srl. Aggeai caming an for Part Hear\u00e9 in\nHearing\" Mattars, this dayT the Scurt delivere\ufb01 tha\nfollowing:\n\n \n\n\n\n4,the signature 5f the zespondent 13 admitted and in\n\n\"the ,Ci:camstances, a presumption ariseg under\n\n~Affth\u00e9'xsub\ufb01it\u00a7 that the Trial Court has committed\n'*t\u00a7i@\u00a7aiity' in granting an Order sf acquittal. On\n'w,ghi\u00e9 aspect of the mattar, the laarned counsel for\n\nV *. the appellant has relie\u00e9 upan the deciaian of the\n\nrecord, the 'trial Court acquitted the respondeat.\n\nAggxieved by tne acquittal, the apgallantt \"as\n\napproached this \ufb02aunt in appeal.\n\n3. E hav@ heard the learned cQuns\u00a7ltt\ufb01r.th\u00e9 .\n\nappellant and alse the res\u00a7ond@\ufb01t.\u00bbt'\n\n\u00e9. Tha point that atis\u00e9a f0f~my.cbnSidetationr\nis;\n\nWhether the 3\ufb01dgme\ufb01t}3h\u00a7nQtder of\n\nacquittai of the_v,r\u00e9s@c\ufb01de\ufb01ttt\"under\n\nSectian 133,df the A\ufb01t is illtgal and\n\n@ezv@\u00a5S@?t, 1,3\n5. 7it is th\u00e9V\u00a7ontent;0n of tha learned counsel\n\nfor tha ap\ufb01eiiant.thatu\u00a7S3\u00a7anCe Qf the cheque under\n\nS\u00e9Cti?QV1\u00a7\u00a7_of*the Act. As the respsndent has not\n\nled aty such evidanca to rebut the said prasumption,\n\nHon'bie Agex Cmurt, reported in AIR 2001 Supreme\n\n \n\n\n\nmaintainabie ih,iew.' So far as the oresumption is\n\ni,oohoerne&amp;Q he also relied upon the decision of the\n\nit\" CourrgJ1QQ8ii\u00a7$narat Barrel and Drum Manufacturing\n\"fQ%\u00a2ompao \"ye; Amie Chand Peyrelei} and also AIR 2601\n\n'\"4_s\u00a7\u00a7:\u00a7e\u00a7\u00ab Court 2895 [<a href=\"\/doc\/1486400\/\">K.N.Beema vs. Muniyappan and<\/a>\ni\".ienother], wherein the Hon'hie Apex Court dealing\n\nvi*e_ with the provisions of Sections 138 and 139 of the\n\nCourt 389? E\ufb01iten P.Daiai Vs. Bratindrenath\nBaner\ufb01ee], wherein the Apex Court has held that the\npresumption under Section 139 of the Act is\" the\noresumption of law; which ought to have be\u00a7\u00a77\u00a7a;\u00a7\u00e9ax\nin the said case end that to rebutf the: ea:&amp;*'\npresumption, mere plaueibie veXplanationiiie'onot_\n\nsufficient and the proof {of fegpia\u00a7a\u00a7;\u00a7gT5 iii\n\nneceesary. He has also 'reii?d tUPeh. t\u00a7e;i\u00a7\ufb02Ci\u00e9iOn'Vi\n\nreported in AIR EOGE Supreme Court 3Qi\u20ac_Ei2C.B.S.\nLtd. Vs. Beemna Sha\ufb01eer_aod;another\u00a7, wherein the\n\nHon'ble Apex Court has held tnet even in respect of\n\ne guarantor, ftheviaooueed i3_ responsible and en\n\nection could be \u00a7a%eniunder'Seotion 338 of the Act\n\nand a complaint i\u00bba\u00a73inst the guarantor is\n\nHoo;hiein\u00a7\u00a7e2VfC\u00a2urt reported in AER' 199\u00a7 Supreme\n\nAct has held that the burden of proving that cheque\n\nhad not been issued for any debt or liability is on\n\n \n\n\n\npresumetien nneef\"Section 139 of the Act does not\n\n*Variee$\n\ninireeerds her financial capacity to advance the lean\n\"g\u00a7afes-2,se,aea~0e en 95.08.1999. She has not\nii\"maintained any account and furthermere, she does not\n\n*.eey as te whether she is an income tax payee er net.\n\nherein that there was a lean transaction of\nRs.3\u00a7,GOGwOO and that the comeiaint was re\ufb01ning e\nchit business and as the security for the eeeent gt;\nlean ef Rs.30,000--GG, the blank cheg\u00a7eea\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7:ngf_i\nNo.919877 of State Bank of Myeete\"wae_iseeee.i?\u00a7eI\naccused said t\ufb02u\ufb01: the cheque \u00a7\u00a7;1\u00a7g\u00e9st:\u00a7\u00a7t\ufb01g, \ufb01%;fiQ\nwas issued es the complainant st\u00e9tee'z\ufb01a\u00a3\u00a7\u00a7h\u00e9 has\nmispiaced the earlier eheqqe: \ufb02Teetefefe; it is his\ncentention that the biant-ehe\u00a7@e;e\ufb01hich was received\nhas been misplaced and the biaeks eete tilled in and\nhe also subeite4t\u00a7e:\u00bbEhe=apge$;antm5eing the tenant\n\nwas not in ;a%1eositienT\u00abte\" a\ufb01vance the lean of\n\nRs.2,SOfQOOrOQ end in \ufb01ne abeence of any materiei on\n\nrecord to: prove \"ner'gfineecial Capacity. The\n\n2.8. Ne#;_aetceeld be seen from the evidence of\n\n?.W.i i.e., the comglainant, nowhere she states as\n\nTherefere, the perusal of her evidence reveals that\n\n \n\n\n\n5.biank~etamp\"peperVef Rs.1QS-O0 denominetien an\u00e9 two\n\n,vhereie we\u00a7e ettained referring te the loan amount of\nv &gt;_ iQ\u00a7H' ef~:\u00a73.\u00a7Q,\ufb02OQ~OO. This compiaint. came to be\n\"= tedee\ufb02aegainet the appeiiant herein an 19\u00b0S2.2SG\u00a7.\n' he eeeasal of the copy cf the cemplaint Ex.\u00a75 and\n*\u00a7\ufb01\u00e9 allegations made therein reveal that they are\n\nccesistent with the reply given by the accused under\n\nthere is \ufb01e material to preve that she had the\nfinanciai capacity\" ta advance the huge amount of\n\nRs.2,50,000-O0. It is further relevant to mete teat\n\nEU\n\na comgiaint came to b lodged by the accu;\u00e9dt\u00a7$&amp;t\u00a3\u00a7\u00a7e\ncopy of the said cempleint \u00a7as__\u00a2eeg\"\"p\u00a7\u00e9g\u00a7\u00a7e\u00a7.'a;\"\nEx.D5, wherein the appellent tbe:e;\ufb01V'ie etheitfifSt\naccused ia the said case she it getetsfte the ehite \nbusiness run by her and the fespende\ufb01tiheretn filed\nthe complainant egaieet the: eeeeilant tetein and\n\nothers under sections 4G6,. 4jG;\".\u00e967\u00a2e\"471 and $06\n\nEPC. it is aieeespecifi\u00e9 eliegatgen made against\n\nthe a Delle\ufb01t 59:51: th\u00e9t i\ufb01 View of the aueit of\npt    1\n\nthe fund _to'=gr;enge_\u00b0thef payment in the chit\nbusinees,'a_blenk_dn\"deme\ufb01d promissory note with the\n\nsignature ef the respendent herein and another and 3\n\nhle\ufb01k \u00e9eeque\u00e9 with the signatures ef the respondent\n\nEX.P5, preduced by the comglainant. So, the perusal\n\n54:.\n\n \n\n\n\n10\n\naf the evidenca of P.W.1 in the context of the\n\ufb01afencei taken by the accused, 1 do not fia\ufb01. any\nmaterial as regardg the ability or figa\ufb01\ufb01iai\ncapacityi of tha complainant to advance r\ufb01yii\u00e9r\u00e9hi\u00e9\ufb01i\nRs.2,S{},\u00a3}GG-~{}\u00a33 on 05.08.1999. :3\u00bb,_y;a,es..;'\"'::\u00a7Tf'_';,2{\u00a7:\nthat the compiaint came to b\ufb01r iQd@\u00e9$i,$gri\u00a7S\ufb01fJrh\u00a7\nappaiiant herein by the reS\u00a7Qyde\ufb01t[r@gaI\u00a7i\u00a7\u00a7_\u00a73:8&amp;1ii\nof chit basiness and obtaini\ufb01\u00a7 the Elarkicr\u00e9que and\nin view' of the fact' ihati \ufb01r.\u00a7i g\u00e9\u00e9ntai\ufb01r 'if words\ntypewritten lends more g\ufb01\ufb01p\u00e9rri\ufb01gwg\ufb01\u00e9g\ufb01efence of the\n\naccused.\n\nthat P.Wg1;inVh&amp;r*$Vide\ufb01C9'states that sinc\u00e9 8 years\n\nprior to th\u00e9VcQm\u00a7laint;_E\ufb01\u00e9re are many transactions\n\nof iQan.havi\ufb01g,beeh adv\u00e9nced ta the accused and this\n\nwfact'i\u00e9seif\u00ab\u00a7rove\u00e9\"$ati3factoriiy that the appellant\n\nVwa5.iunni\ufb01gimbney leading business and when it is\n\n30} if is \u00e9saentiai for her to hold a msney iemdiag\n\n'iic@ns\u00e9.\"y&amp; Having regard to the loan transacticn\n\n.\"e\u00e9rlier between the complainant and the accused, the\n\nx4.\u00e9\u00e9mpi3inant states that on O5.88.i999 she advanced a\n\n\"ia\u00e9\ufb01 of Rs.2,50,GOG~GG, which was repayabie with\n\n~riht\u00e9rest at 18%. So, in the cantext of this\n\n\n\n_which_ hes. ba\u00e9nx\ufb02supperted by the other decuments\n\nAypre\u00e9uced. by zthe respondent is also sufficient to\n\nQf%with the zepiy netice Ex.P5.\n\ng\ufb01ieeed reliance on the decisien ef the Hen'bie Apex\n\nnu\ufb01aurt reported in 2008 AIR SSW 738 [Krishna\n\n11\n\nadmisaion in her own chiefwexamination abeui her\nmeney' lending business siece% 8 years reveals ethat\nshe is a money lender and therefere it was e$ee$\u00a7;el \nfez her te held a license under eke prC\u00a7%s\u00a7eeete\u00a7\n\nthe Kareataka Memey Lenders Act;\n\n10. Though the signatureW gee the %\u00a2n@qg\u00a7j*;5*\nadmitted, there is a presumeeien \u00a7nd\u00a7r.$e\u00a7\u00a7i5\ufb01\"139\nof the act as referred to ih {\ufb01e \u00e9ecisie\u00a7s\"geferred\nto Segre. The said presu\ufb01ptieefieeeee\ufb01eable and t\ufb01e\nfact that \ufb01he epeelia\ufb01\ufb01 hes \u00a7a\u00a7e;\u00e9q{;$y evidence to\n\nprove her fin3ncieLZCape\u00a2ityf:S one of the grounds.\n\nIt is suffLe;ente\u00a7ie \"rebut \"the\" presumption raised.\nApart frem'thjs{ the eyide\ufb01ce of 9.Ws.1 and 2 and\n\nthe fact tie: the cempieimt was ledqed as yer Ex.B5,\n\npfbbabaii\u00e9e_ {he \u00e9efence of the accuaed i.e.,\n\nrespeedent herein. The said defence is consistent\n\n&gt;31. The learned ceunsel for the respondent has\n\nJanardhan Bhat Vs. Dattatraya G.Heg&amp;e} and the\n\n \n\n\n\n12\n\nHon'bie Aoex Court has held that it is not necessary\n\nfor the accused to enter the witness--box and that\n\nthe presumption raised can be tebuttee~ on_ tee'\n\nmaterieie brought on record and that it deeenoe'upee_\n\nthe actual material of each eesef\" S0,$ioCkieg to\n\nthe principles iaid~down and the evidence Eeo,-I7ama\n\nof the opinion that the*,\u00bbepoeilantf \u00b0\u00a7\u00a7\u00a7\"\" not'\n\nestabliehed the fieeeoiei ,oapaeity' to 'advance the\n\nloan of Rs.2,50,o0Q-dG'i',an'c:t_  evez\": if the\n\npresumption i34:atsedge\ufb01det.SeetionJi3\u00a7 of the Act,\nit stood re\u00a7utt@\u00a7i;r\u00a7e_t\u00a7\u00a7.fap\u00a3V\u00a3\ufb01\u00e9: the appellant\nhad no fiea\ufb01gietgoetecitet\ufb01\u00e9iaovence the Loan. In\nadditioe to, the oefeeee_put-forth by the accuse\u00e9\ni.e., the ,tespoheeot;\ufb01%%Eein is more probable and\n\ntherefore{ Iuem of the opinion that the eooueed hag\n\n3 discharged the burden by leading sufficient evidence\n\nto tebut the ereeumption raised \ufb01nder Section 139 of\n\nthe Rot. \"S5 far as the burden on the part of the\n\ni*_ua\u00a7peliantA:i3 concerned, he aieo relied upon the\n\n\"'edeCtSto\u00a7 reported by the Hon'bie High Court of\n\nim_\"Madta$, repoztedt in \"Judgments on Negotiable\n\ntinetrumonts on Dishoeou: of cheques\", 514 [P.Jayeraj\n\nVs. R.Saroja}, wherein taking into coneideration,\n\nthe burden to prove the debt or iiability if any for\n\nf\n\n \n\n\n\n \n\n14\n\nanswer the point in negative an\u00e9 proceed to pass the\n\nfailowingz\n\nORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>The appeal is dismisse&amp;.<\/p>\n<p>Ksm*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Karnataka High Court Savithri vs J Santhosh Babu on 1 December, 2008 Author: A.S.Pachhapure IN THE RISE CQURT OF KARNATRKA A? BANGALGRE DATED THZ$ $33 1&#8243; DAY 99 DECEMBER, 2\u00a7Q8 BEFCRE: THE HGN&#8217;BLE MR. JUSTZCE A.s. \u00a7AcaaAg$RE[g[:f &#8216; CQZMZNAL APPEAL N0.13\u00e91 Q5 ge3:fj &#8216; BETWEEN: Savithri, Wfo. Chandra, Majcz, Rfat No.K&#8211;70, 5&#8243; Cross, Left Side [&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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-58690","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Savithri vs J Santhosh Babu on 1 December, 2008 - 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\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Savithri vs J Santhosh Babu on 1 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-01-07T10:27:50+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\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Savithri vs J Santhosh Babu on 1 December, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-07T10:27:50+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008\"},\"wordCount\":27,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008\",\"name\":\"Savithri vs J Santhosh Babu on 1 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-07T10:27:50+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Savithri vs J Santhosh Babu on 1 December, 2008\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Savithri vs J Santhosh Babu on 1 December, 2008 - 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\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Savithri vs J Santhosh Babu on 1 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-01-07T10:27:50+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\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Savithri vs J Santhosh Babu on 1 December, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-07T10:27:50+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008"},"wordCount":27,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008","name":"Savithri vs J Santhosh Babu on 1 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-07T10:27:50+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/savithri-vs-j-santhosh-babu-on-1-december-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Savithri vs J Santhosh Babu on 1 December, 2008"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/58690","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=58690"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58690\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=58690"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=58690"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=58690"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}