{"id":59301,"date":"2009-08-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-08-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009"},"modified":"2018-03-17T06:04:25","modified_gmt":"2018-03-17T00:34:25","slug":"punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009","title":{"rendered":"Punnukkan Govindan vs Punnukkan Thambayi on 17 August, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Punnukkan Govindan vs Punnukkan Thambayi on 17 August, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRSA.No. 129 of 2009()\n\n\n1. PUNNUKKAN GOVINDAN,S\/O.KUNHAPPA,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. PUNNUKKAN THAMBAYI, W\/O.PUTHIYA VEETTIL\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. KALLYANI, AGRICULTURIST, THIMIRI AMSOM\n\n3. MADHAVI, AGRICULTURIST,RESIDING AT\n\n4. KERALA KALLIANI,W\/O.LATE PUNNUKKAN\n\n5. DAMODHARAN,S\/O.LATE PUNNUKKAN KUNHIRAMAN\n\n6. DEVU, D\/O.LATE PUNNUKKAN KUNHIRAMAN,\n\n7. SAROJINI, D\/O.LATE PUNNUKKAN KUNHIRAMAN,\n\n8. JANARDHANAN,\n\n9. PRAKASAN, S\/O.LATE PUNNUKKAN KUNHIRAMAN,\n\n10. PADMANABHAN, S\/O.LATE PUNNUKKAN\n\n11. NARAYANANI, W\/O.PUNNUKKAN KUMARAN,\n\n12. PRASANNA, D\/O.W\/O.PUNNUKKAN KUMARAN,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.MATHEW KURIAKOSE\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID\n\n Dated :17\/08\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                     HARUN-UL-RASHID, J.\n                   -----------------------------------\n                      R.S.A.No.129 of 2009\n                  -------------------------------------\n           Dated this the 17th day of August, 2009\n\n                            JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
           The plaintiff in O.S.No.507 of 1996 on the file of the<\/p>\n
Munsiff’s Court, Taliparamba is the appellant. The appeal is<\/p>\n
directed against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.46 of 1999<\/p>\n
on the file of the Sub Court, Payyannur.               The trial court<\/p>\n
dismissed the suit for partition and confirmed in appeal. Hence,<\/p>\n
the second appeal.\n<\/p>\n
     2.    The plaintiff claims 43\/84 share in the plaint schedule<\/p>\n
property with future mean profit. The plaintiff claims title on the<\/p>\n
strength of the will. Ext.A1 is a certified copy of the will. Under<\/p>\n
Ext.A1 will different items of properties are allotted to different<\/p>\n
sharers. Item No.31 is one of the items allotted to the plaintiff.<\/p>\n
In Ext.A1 will one half of the Manikkankariparambu is allotted to<\/p>\n
the plaintiff. The plaintiff is claiming right and title and the<\/p>\n
plaintiff claims title over half share of the plaint schedule<\/p>\n
property on the basis of the allotment in the will.           It is an<\/p>\n
admitted fact that as per the same will the husband of the 5th<\/p>\n
defendant and the father of the defendants 6 to 11 is entitled to<\/p>\n
get 2\/7th share in the property mentioned in item No.31. The said<\/p>\n
R.S.A.No.129 of 2009
\n                                  2<\/span><\/p>\n
item is item No.4 in the will. Item No.11 in Ext.A1 will is also<\/p>\n
1\/7th share of the plaint schedule property. Similarly the second<\/p>\n
defendant is allotted 1\/7th share of the plaint schedule property<\/p>\n
which is shown as item No.16, 3rd defendant 1\/7th share shown as<\/p>\n
item No.22 and 4th defendant 1\/7th share as item No.27. The trial<\/p>\n
court on the basis of the allotment in Ext.A1 take note of the fact<\/p>\n
that the very same property which is shown as item No.31 was<\/p>\n
divided by deceased Kunhappa to his different children. The<\/p>\n
property was allotted by Kunhappa in Ext.A1 to his children, first<\/p>\n
to the elder and followed by others one by one. It is an admitted<\/p>\n
case of the parties that the plaintiff is the youngest son of the<\/p>\n
deceased Kunhappa and deceased Kunjiraman is the eldest son.<\/p>\n
It is further admitted that being the eldest son, Kunjiraman was<\/p>\n
allotted a major share of the property described in Ext.A1. The<\/p>\n
trial court also noted the fact after giving property to the elder<\/p>\n
children, the remaining property is only 1\/7th share in item No.31<\/p>\n
and so it can be seen that the intention of the testator deceased<\/p>\n
Kunhappa was to allot 1\/7th share to the plaintiff.<\/p>\n
      3.   If the plaint averment is accepted, 1\/7th share alone<\/p>\n
will remain for partition. It is the plaintiff’s version that, reading<\/p>\n
the recitals of the will there remains only 1\/7th share that he is<\/p>\n
R.S.A.No.129 of 2009
\n                                 3<\/span><\/p>\n
entitled to one half of the plaint schedule property plus 1\/7th<\/p>\n
share which remains unallotted.           The trial court after<\/p>\n
considering Ext.A1 will held that, if the intention of the testator<\/p>\n
is to give one half of the share of the plaint schedule property, it<\/p>\n
should have been mentioned to whom he allotted remaining 1\/7th<\/p>\n
share. According to the defendant after the death of Kunhappa<\/p>\n
they have divided the properties orally and now they have<\/p>\n
separate possession of their respective shares. It is further<\/p>\n
contended by the defendants that they have obtained purchase<\/p>\n
certificates in respect of their shares and subsequently the<\/p>\n
defendants executed documents transferring their right to<\/p>\n
others. Ext.B1, B3, B5, & B8 are the purchase certificates, B2<\/p>\n
series and B6 are tax receipts, etc are produced to show that<\/p>\n
they are enjoying the properties separately.\n<\/p>\n
      4.   After appreciating oral and documentary evidence<\/p>\n
tendered by both sides the trial court held that the respective<\/p>\n
shareres obtained purchase certificates in respect of their<\/p>\n
shares, that other properties are also given by deceased<\/p>\n
Kunhappa to his children and that plaintiff has not filed any suit<\/p>\n
to get division in those properties.      All these circumstances<\/p>\n
probabilises the case of the defendants to the effect that after<\/p>\n
R.S.A.No.129 of 2009
\n                                  4<\/span><\/p>\n
the death of Kunhappa the plaintiff and defendants divided the<\/p>\n
properties in terms of Ext.A1, therefore the court found that the<\/p>\n
plaintiff is not having any partible right as claimed by him and<\/p>\n
the plaint schedule property is not available for further partition.<\/p>\n
     5.     The plaintiff filed appeal. The learned Judge,<\/p>\n
Payyannur appreciated the facts, circumstances and evidence<\/p>\n
and rightly concluded that the case of plaintiff that the plaint<\/p>\n
schedule property has not been partitioned and is lying in<\/p>\n
common is liable to be rejected. The appellate court also arrived<\/p>\n
at the very same conclusions and held that lower appellate court<\/p>\n
has rightly dismissed the suit holding the plaint schedule<\/p>\n
property is not partible. I have examined the findings and<\/p>\n
conclusions arrived at by both courts. The allottment of = share<\/p>\n
in the plaint schedule property to the plaintiff is only a mistake<\/p>\n
crept in it and infact the testator intented to convey only 1\/7th<\/p>\n
share to the plaintiff. This is the only possible interpretation that<\/p>\n
can be given to the allottment of share to the plaintiff. The<\/p>\n
portions of property were allotted to elder children and what<\/p>\n
remains is only 1\/7th share and therefore whatever allotment<\/p>\n
made can only be confined to 1\/7th share alone. In fact the plaint<\/p>\n
schedule property was partitioned and share allotted to the elder<\/p>\n
R.S.A.No.129 of 2009
\n                                 5<\/span><\/p>\n
son first and then followed by others one by one. 2\/7th share is<\/p>\n
allotted to the husband of the 5th defendant, 1\/7th share each to<\/p>\n
the defendants 1 to 4. What remains is only 1\/7th share. Courts<\/p>\n
below rightly held that recital in Ext.A1 that one half share in<\/p>\n
plaint schedule property is given to the plaintiff as shown in the<\/p>\n
item 31 is only a mistake. It is observed by the appellate court<\/p>\n
rightly that there is cogent and convincing evidence to show that<\/p>\n
after the death of the Kunhappa the plaint schedule properties<\/p>\n
partitioned and parties have taken separate possession of their<\/p>\n
respective shares. I have referred to the documents relied on by<\/p>\n
the trial court namely Exts.B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B7, B8, etc.<\/p>\n
      6.   The questions whether the plaintiff is entitled to<\/p>\n
partition and allotment of = share of the plaint schedule<\/p>\n
property was considered by both courts elaborately and on an<\/p>\n
interpretation of Ext.A1 and other attended circumstances held<\/p>\n
that the plaintiff cannot claim partition any more. The findings<\/p>\n
of the courts below are based on facts, circumstances and<\/p>\n
probabilities.   The learned counsel for the appellant cited<\/p>\n
[Kaivelikkal Ambunhi (dead) by L.Rs & others Vs.<\/p>\n
H.Ganesh Bhandary (AIR 1995 SC 2491)] [Thankamma<\/p>\n
Kunjamma and others Vs. Gopalakrishnan Unnithan &<\/p>\n
R.S.A.No.129 of 2009
\n                                 6<\/span><\/p>\n
others (1992 (1)KLJ 415)], [Prasanth Vs. Kalliani (2007(2)<\/p>\n
KLT 992)] and canvas the position that if there is any<\/p>\n
inconsistency between the earlier or subsequent part or specific<\/p>\n
clauses inter se contained therein, the earlier part will prevail<\/p>\n
over the latter part. Based on the said decisions it is contended<\/p>\n
that as far as interpretation of a Will is concerned, the<\/p>\n
subsequent part, clause or portion always prevail over the earlier<\/p>\n
part in the matter of “will” or portion because the testator can<\/p>\n
always change his mind and create another bequest in the place<\/p>\n
of the bequest already made in the earlier part or on earlier<\/p>\n
occasion. It was held in the decision cited supra that the last will<\/p>\n
of the testator shall prevail.       The decisions cited and the<\/p>\n
principles stated therein are well settled and accepted<\/p>\n
principles. The said legal principles will apply to each and every<\/p>\n
case depending on the facts, circumstances and probabilities. If<\/p>\n
the intention of the testator to cancel the earlier portion and to<\/p>\n
bequest the property as contented by the plaintiff there is no<\/p>\n
difficulty in deleting the earlier portion. If there is a change of<\/p>\n
intention within a minute or so there is no difficulty in allotting<\/p>\n
the entire property to one sharer. In fact on a reading of Ext.A1<\/p>\n
it is very clear that the plaintiff is take advantage of a mistake<\/p>\n
R.S.A.No.129 of 2009
\n                                 7<\/span><\/p>\n
committed while drafting Ext.A1 will. On a reading of Ext.A1<\/p>\n
I am unable to notice any change of mind while drafting the will,<\/p>\n
that in the case of will the testator can always change his mind<\/p>\n
and create another will in the place of the bequest already made.<\/p>\n
I do not find the principles stated in the reported decisions cited<\/p>\n
is applicable to the case on hand. I have no reason to interfere<\/p>\n
with the judgment and decree passed by the courts below. The<\/p>\n
appellants failed to make out any ground to invoke this court’s<\/p>\n
jurisdiction under section 100 C.P.C. No question of law much<\/p>\n
less any substantial question of law arises for consideration in<\/p>\n
this appeal. Hence, this appeal fails and accordingly dismissed<\/p>\n
in limine.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                 HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE<\/p>\n
Skj.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Punnukkan Govindan vs Punnukkan Thambayi on 17 August, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RSA.No. 129 of 2009() 1. PUNNUKKAN GOVINDAN,S\/O.KUNHAPPA, … Petitioner Vs 1. PUNNUKKAN THAMBAYI, W\/O.PUTHIYA VEETTIL … Respondent 2. KALLYANI, AGRICULTURIST, THIMIRI AMSOM 3. MADHAVI, AGRICULTURIST,RESIDING AT 4. KERALA KALLIANI,W\/O.LATE PUNNUKKAN 5. DAMODHARAN,S\/O.LATE PUNNUKKAN KUNHIRAMAN 6. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-59301","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nPunnukkan Govindan vs Punnukkan Thambayi on 17 August, 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\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Punnukkan Govindan vs Punnukkan Thambayi on 17 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-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=\"2009-08-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-03-17T00:34:25+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\\\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Punnukkan Govindan vs Punnukkan Thambayi on 17 August, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-17T00:34:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1483,\"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\\\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009\",\"name\":\"Punnukkan Govindan vs Punnukkan Thambayi on 17 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-17T00:34:25+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Punnukkan Govindan vs Punnukkan Thambayi on 17 August, 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":"Punnukkan Govindan vs Punnukkan Thambayi on 17 August, 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\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Punnukkan Govindan vs Punnukkan Thambayi on 17 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-08-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-03-17T00:34:25+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\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Punnukkan Govindan vs Punnukkan Thambayi on 17 August, 2009","datePublished":"2009-08-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-17T00:34:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009"},"wordCount":1483,"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\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009","name":"Punnukkan Govindan vs Punnukkan Thambayi on 17 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-08-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-17T00:34:25+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/punnukkan-govindan-vs-punnukkan-thambayi-on-17-august-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Punnukkan Govindan vs Punnukkan Thambayi on 17 August, 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\/59301","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=59301"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59301\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=59301"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=59301"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=59301"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}