{"id":60206,"date":"2010-11-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-11-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010"},"modified":"2014-12-22T21:54:38","modified_gmt":"2014-12-22T16:24:38","slug":"channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010","title":{"rendered":"Channachari S\/O Late Kalachari vs M\/S San Engineering & Loco-Motive … on 25 November, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Channachari S\/O Late Kalachari vs M\/S San Engineering & Loco-Motive … on 25 November, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: Subhash B.Adi<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT \n\nDATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER \n\nBEFORE  \u00a2\n\nTHE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE   _\n\nREGULAR FIRST i\\}O_.83S\/2C\u00a7Q;\u00a7'  \nBEIWEEN: VA A\n\nChannachari   .\nAged about 56__Vears   _  '\nS \/ 0 Late Ka_1,ac1f;ari '\n\nNo.6232,%13d\u00e9'1v;A.:r1.% = j   \n\n1st Block, 1111\" Sta\u00abg'e.V    A\n\nBasaVeshw'araf1ag'ar ..  \n\nBaI1_ga10r\u00e9'+- 56.0 \"V079. \" ...APPELLAN'I'\n\n \"    {B\u00a7}5'SriA..:C.M.Naigab11ushana, Adv. ,)\n\n Sari Eri\u00e9ineering &\n\nLo\u00e90--ri1Qtive C0,, Ltd.,\n\n P.o.Bo;: N0.4802\n.. Whitefield Road\n\"  Bangalore -- 560 048\n'~  \"Represented by its\n A ._..Managing Director. ...RESPONDENT<\/pre>\n
[By M\/s S.N.Murthy & Assts., 8:\n<\/p>\n
Sri. Somashekar, Advs.)<\/p>\n
I’-Q<\/p>\n
This R.F.A.is filed under Section 96 of CPC
\nthe judgment and decree dated 2.3.2oo5,paeeedan<\/p>\n
OS.No.8959\/2001 on the file of the V111 Addl.VCit\u00a7”C.ii;il”\u00bb
\nJudge, Bangalore city [CCH:15)J.dis_mis_sing” for”. <\/p>\n
damages.\n<\/p>\n
This appeal is comii1g”‘-on fortdictatir1\u00a7;’judgmer1’twif<\/p>\n
this day, the Court delivered__the: fol_lowir1g.:f_\u00a7_ V’?<\/p>\n
 the judgment and
\ndecreepassed’in:0e;SL}’i~l0;S9h59\/01 dated 02.03.2005 on
\nthe file ofthe  Civil Judge, Bangalore.<\/p>\n
  The Allpavr-eie’s would be referred as per their<\/p>\n
   the trial court.\n<\/p>\n
 is one for declaration that the termination<\/p>\n
 of tlie3 plaintiff from the service of the defendant-<\/p>\n
 “C_o’_\ufb01-ipany with effect from 26.09.2000 is arbitrary,<\/p>\n
  0. iillegal and claimed Rs.3 lakhs by way of compensation.<\/p>\n
4. The case of the plaintiff is that  was
\nappointed as a \ufb01tter on 13.01.1975 on daily’:’RTZ$i.’%?:’\u00a5eSVV of
\nRs.1i.60\/–. As he was working sincerely pgiiitll
\nhe was promoted. On
\nindividually called several
\nprepared by the Corpo’iiat’e.t_> Office   “lthemii
\nincluding the plaintiff  precarious
\nfinancial condition of Company is<\/p>\n
unable to con~t:iri~1_ie _:the.4Vs*eiv_iVce “of the plaintiff and<\/p>\n
insisted ‘– l = ‘l should tender voluntary<\/p>\n
resignation. .   piaintiff did not agree, on the<\/p>\n
   or.1_.._.26.09.2000, when he went to the<\/p>\n
‘ .~facto1*y,:”~l;1c not permitted and was asked to meet<\/p>\n
.thelAManag_efnent at the hotel. At the hotel, about 9<\/p>\n
 persons from the management were present in the room<\/p>\n
“if  the plaintiff was called and was forced to tender<\/p>\n
   his resignation and was issued with cheque for a sum<\/p>\n
of Rs.i,35,000\/–~ and Rs.12,089\/– towards ex–gratia<\/p>\n
payment. The said resignation was obtained by 3<\/p>\n
r%%<\/p>\n
coercion\/force. By letter dated 24.10.2000, the
\nManagement also issued another for
\nRs.60,473\/~\u00bb towards gratuity amount.
\nanother 61\/2 years service, he
\ndefault or misconduct and it
\ncoercive steps taken by  60
\nyears service. Since the  was  salary of
\nRs. 10,000\/– at the of his service, as
\nsuch, he is entitled  lRs.5 lakhs with<\/p>\n
interest at   In this regard, he issued a<\/p>\n
legal noticed dated0:54li’.2001 and the Management gave<\/p>\n
  c_l_ated””23.._05.2001 denying the allegation and<\/p>\n
 V  —the claim of the plaintiff. It is in these<\/p>\n
‘circumstances, the plaintiff was constrained to file a<\/p>\n
 suit;\n<\/p>\n
5. The Defer1dant-Company on service of<\/p>\n
‘summons, appeared and filed written statement. it<\/p>\n
denied that the Management had compelled the plaintiff<\/p>\n
t
\ncsts’.\n<\/p>\n
u– ,<\/p>\n
to tender resignation. However, the Management<\/p>\n
admitted that the Company was suffering from<\/p>\n
\ufb01nancial problems. This circumstance <\/p>\n
the notice of the employees and onDnegotiations,”pl’aintiff” , <\/p>\n
has agreed to accept the pac-,kage.~ Acc0rding1y,l’l’1O:n<\/p>\n
26.09.2000, he voluntari1y:_ter1dere’d  re$ig;1a:i.ci1 am: *<\/p>\n
thereafter, he collected A,t.hleF._chequhe -a.nd_.:\u00a7 ex–gratia
\npayment and also c0i1’ected_vl:hve  amount. It is
\nonly after sevenv..rno:nth:s  hisVi’~resignation, he issued a<\/p>\n
legallknotice  demand for which the
\nmanageinent  “a.:_r.eply and alleged that the plaintiff
\nisrlot _;e11titled”for…the relief as sought for.<\/p>\n
  “SJ –._trial court on the basis of the above<\/p>\n
llpleadingsjhas framed \ufb01ve issues, which is as under:–<\/p>\n
[i) Whether the plaintiff proves that
\nhis termination from the service of the
\ndefendant company with effect from
\n26.09.2000 is unlawful, arbitrary,<\/p>\n
illegal and void?\n<\/p>\n
or”\n<\/p>\n
6<\/span><\/p>\n
(ii) Whether the plaintiff proves
\nhe is entitled to claim Rs.3
\ncompensation from the defendantjV’efoi*<\/p>\n
the remaining periodeof.  ‘4 V’\n<\/p>\n
(iii) Whether the pivaintiff ispl,.”_cntitled–4.l”‘
\nfor declaratory asl’prayed:’v_for*?”‘  <\/p>\n
(iv) To Jjjwhat  parties’ are<\/p>\n
entitled   A l<\/p>\n
{M j;.1y.i?iwh?a.: c\u00bb:d\u00a7er”of[d}:cre.\u00e9?
\n ll examined as PW–l and<\/p>\n
produced””E;:s..Pi-.   On behalf of the defendant.<\/p>\n
   1;_v:vasp.eXarnii’i’ed and produced Exs.D1 to D6. Trial<\/p>\n
  ‘ltgoiirt: appreciation of the evidence on record has held<\/p>\n
 theipiaintiff has not proved the termination is<\/p>\n
 pillegalgand arbitrary and he has also not proved his<\/p>\n
  claim for compensation of Rs.3 lakhs and is not entitled<\/p>\n
 V. _..i’or declaratory relief and accordingly, dismissed the<\/p>\n
suit. It is against this judgment and decree, the plaintiff<\/p>\n
is in this appeal. 9′;’::\ufb01,….\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
8. Learned Counsel for the appellant–p1aintiff<\/p>\n
submitted that it is not in dispute that the p1a.in’tiff,:was<\/p>\n
appointed as a fitter on meager salary of <\/p>\n
the year 1975. Due to his ha;_~d”‘werl;”.,g1n_d” he i<\/p>\n
was promoted and he Twas”\n<\/p>\n
Rs.10,77i\/-. On 25.09.200v\u00a3l:,”‘*the manageinentffinsisted<\/p>\n
that the plaintiff should tenderelusinresignation. When he
\nis refused to do so,  to enter the<\/p>\n
 and he was compelled
\nto go”  _  Residency road, where 9<\/p>\n
majnagemerit Artlefnhfersff were present and they compelled<\/p>\n
 .hiin tender his resignation. As such, resignation is<\/p>\n
 pnotAdda-,4Valid.A’.i’resignation and is a void document, as it<\/p>\n
does ..i*iot.A\u00ab:atnount to voluntary act. As there were 9<\/p>\n
it  npersoris”. the plaintiff had no other option, except to
\n“.ter1’der his resignation and it is in these circumstances,<\/p>\n
“his resignation was taken. The plaintiff was “not aware<\/p>\n
of his rights, when he was advised to file a suit, he<\/p>\n
1<\/span>
\n1<\/span><\/p>\n
issued a legal notice and the delay should notgcorne in<\/p>\n
the way of the legitimate claim. It is not Vvith\u00e9atp<\/p>\n
the plaintiff had still 61\/2 years service.an,d’ftheife._1sl\u00bbhp<\/p>\n
reason for plaintiff to tender his resig\u00e9natieoii ‘and <\/p>\n
submitted that sirnilarlyf placed._’emp1o3}Vees:4__:Vgoi;; lltlige,<\/p>\n
bene\ufb01t of more than whatlzthe got. He
\ntherefore submitted…_z’:g”that the court Without
\nappreciating the evidences on_rsco1fd;”lias dismissed the<\/p>\n
suit, which Ltallsnfor..ii1terfereng.3,’ <\/p>\n
_On the”:.other::’i3and, learned Counsel for the<\/p>\n
defer1dant:~5Compan3}’ siihmitted that. defendant does not<\/p>\n
   thewplaintiff was working in the company.<\/p>\n
 .1-I.ic_;wxe=.-r.’=,\u00a7’i–*,.,gCV  company’s \ufb01nancial position was not<\/p>\n
so’und,\u00b0  Company was under the financial crises and<\/p>\n
 nu.nder”” the precarious circumstances, the Company<\/p>\n
C “negotiated with the employees, bringing to their notice<\/p>\n
V’ ” “the Company’s position, and under these circumstances<\/p>\n
the employees tendered voluntary resignation and same<\/p>\n
was accepted. The management had offered package.<\/p>\n
which was accepted by the employees and accordingly.<\/p>\n
plaintiff had also accepted the package””‘a:’id:<\/p>\n
tendered his resignation, and after  mon_ey.. <\/p>\n
and also after collecting the gratuityaainountQ”-afte:r.__}a.ps&e<\/p>\n
of 7 months, he issued*:a’~..\u00a7egai’~.not.ice;’I  <\/p>\n
voiuntary resignation, plaintiff-.c_oL1_}d not liavetkept quiet
\nfor 7 months. He a1soi”s.ubmi.t’teud’thattaking advantage
\nof package _”‘c1T.?<Z1 .a':terI';   same. as an<\/p>\n
afterthot1'gl1t,"'v"t:heVtpiaintiff "has filed a suit, which is
\nfrivolousiand the'ttriahcourt on proper appreciation of<\/p>\n
 evid"en.c_e.has rightly dismissed the suit.<\/p>\n
1  Eight of the submissions, the point that
\nart-.ses__"for 'consideration is as to<\/p>\n
"VVhether the judgment and decree of<\/p>\n
the trial court calls for interference"?
\n1 1. The facts which are not in dispute are that the<\/p>\n
plaintiff was an employee in the defendant company and<\/p>\n
he had worked from 1975 till 26.09.2000. <\/p>\n
according to the plaintiff, on <\/p>\n
informed by the management that he  .. <\/p>\n
resignation, for which he had7,_Vno.t~agreed-,andVen the<\/p>\n
next day he was prevented and    <\/p>\n
resignation was obtained.  is ac\u00abeepted?, plaintiff
\nwould not have kept"'qt1iet'–.fo;f  to issue a legal
\nnotice allegingithat not voluntary. It<\/p>\n
is also not   tliat  plaintiff makes
\nan application of gratuity. It is also not in<\/p>\n
dispute  received the gratuity amount<\/p>\n
  of ch'eq1_.1e_.son 24.10.2000 for an amount of\n<\/p>\n
  –_i\\\/lanagement alleges that if he has not
\n resignation he would not have
\n aceeptedlthe compensation of Rs.1,35,000\/– and ex~
\nA “if payment Rs. l2,089\/- which are paid by cheque.<\/p>\n
 it is not in dispute that the plaintiff got both the<\/p>\n
cheques encashed and after nearly one week, he makes<\/p>\n
an application for payment of gratuity. Gratuity was<\/p>\n
\u00e9tri<\/p>\n
F<\/p>\n
not paid on the very same day and it was received on<\/p>\n
24.10.2000. If the plaintiff had intended to  he<\/p>\n
could not have made an application for;payf(n.e1n.;_.Vuof<\/p>\n
gratuity and he could not have receiVed_.the_ic-heque, .. 9 <\/p>\n
for 7 months, he did nothing. it <\/p>\n
he calls that the resignation’\u00abtendered by   ><\/p>\n
however there is no evide’nce–.._to  that the
\nmanagement obtair1.exti_’  in  by force.
\nManagement has admitted  c.oi:npany’s financial<\/p>\n
position “‘-and it was facing difficulty and
\nas suchi\ufb01itd had._made:_”.the request to the employees to<\/p>\n
acc’ep:t_gf’thge paciaage; After having accepted the same,<\/p>\n
‘ ssuitgwas  my opinion, voiuntary resignation is a
\n if it is coercive action, he could have
\n taiienia “proper action immediately. Assuming that
\n i.thei?e was some dispute between the management and<\/p>\n
  the plaintiff and was any confusion, after having<\/p>\n
accepted the compensation and also ex–gratia amount,<\/p>\n
the fact that after giving resignation. making an<\/p>\n
application for gratuity and accepting the gratuity by<\/p>\n
cheque, this clearly show that the p1aintiff..’teiidered<\/p>\n
voluntary resignation, there was no
\naccepted all the payments.   the
\npayment, as an after thought, the   <\/p>\n
opinion, the trial courtddoiri-.._pr0per ‘apdprevcivatiiig they<\/p>\n
evidence on record has rightiy’~.disrfii,ssed the suit.<\/p>\n
12. Learned  had relied on<\/p>\n
decisiondqof  reported in AIR 1969 Mysore
\n230, stat’ing’   act is done under the
\ncoercion,  does ‘not’vaiidate such an act.<\/p>\n
 113. The fadctsdin the said case is entirely different.<\/p>\n
  Vprove that it is wrongful act, it is not proved<\/p>\n
the resignation was under force or pressure or<\/p>\n
 xcompu.-ision. In turn the conduct of the piaintiff and the
\nhe ‘~~V_Vcirei1mstances do prove that he tendered his resignation<\/p>\n
 ”  opened eyes and after having accepted everything,<\/p>\n
the suit was filed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
14. Considering the same, there is no error
\nCommitted by the triai court in dismissing the  N0
\ngrounds to interfere.\n<\/p>\n
15. Accordingly, I pass the fo110\\vin_g;u: ‘  in<\/p>\n
;V’VAppe’aI5i_s dis1i;is’se_’cE. No order as to costs.<\/p>\n
sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
JUDGE<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Channachari S\/O Late Kalachari vs M\/S San Engineering & Loco-Motive … on 25 November, 2010 Author: Subhash B.Adi IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER BEFORE \u00a2 THE HON’BLE MRJUSTICE _ REGULAR FIRST i\\}O_.83S\/2C\u00a7Q;\u00a7’ BEIWEEN: VA A Channachari . Aged about 56__Vears _ ‘ S […]<\/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-60206","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nChannachari S\/O Late Kalachari vs M\/S San Engineering & Loco-Motive ... on 25 November, 2010 - 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\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Channachari S\/O Late Kalachari vs M\/S San Engineering & Loco-Motive ... on 25 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-12-22T16:24:38+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\\\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Channachari S\\\/O Late Kalachari vs M\\\/S San Engineering & Loco-Motive … on 25 November, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-12-22T16:24:38+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1692,\"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\\\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010\",\"name\":\"Channachari S\\\/O Late Kalachari vs M\\\/S San Engineering & Loco-Motive ... on 25 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-12-22T16:24:38+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Channachari S\\\/O Late Kalachari vs M\\\/S San Engineering & Loco-Motive … on 25 November, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Channachari S\/O Late Kalachari vs M\/S San Engineering & Loco-Motive ... on 25 November, 2010 - 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\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Channachari S\/O Late Kalachari vs M\/S San Engineering & Loco-Motive ... on 25 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-12-22T16:24:38+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\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Channachari S\/O Late Kalachari vs M\/S San Engineering & Loco-Motive … on 25 November, 2010","datePublished":"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-12-22T16:24:38+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010"},"wordCount":1692,"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\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010","name":"Channachari S\/O Late Kalachari vs M\/S San Engineering & Loco-Motive ... on 25 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-12-22T16:24:38+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/channachari-so-late-kalachari-vs-ms-san-engineering-loco-motive-on-25-november-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Channachari S\/O Late Kalachari vs M\/S San Engineering & Loco-Motive … on 25 November, 2010"}]},{"@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\/60206","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=60206"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60206\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=60206"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=60206"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=60206"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}