{"id":62806,"date":"2010-02-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010"},"modified":"2015-04-12T02:20:42","modified_gmt":"2015-04-11T20:50:42","slug":"pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"Pushpa @ Malathi vs Ranebennur Taluka Education … on 2 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Pushpa @ Malathi vs Ranebennur Taluka Education … on 2 February, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: K.L.Manjunath And Kumar<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, CIRCUIT BENCH AT\nDI-IARWAD.\n\nDATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF FEBRUARY 2o1o,f_j\nPRESENT   in 3\nTHE HON'BLE3 MRJUSTICE K.;.,AM;\u00a7NJtr1vA*bij\u00a7:   \u00ab\nAND , . _  1' .\nTHE HON'BLE MR. JUsTICE._ARAV1v;\u00a7b    3\nREGULAR FIRST A1=PEA:iii'i1~\u00a2{\u00a7__\u00a7__;\u00a7s_1 <i\u00a3'2i5Qz\u00a7 \nBetween: '  i  it i   \nPushpa @ N\/Iaiathi, 58 years\nW \/ o Ramarao Desai _\n\nR\/0 saunshi,Kundgkui\ufb01aiiuic.  \nDharwar District;   ' .. ._    ~\n\nRepresented  Praicasti Bistapfia Naik\n\nR\/0 Ranebergnuif, _Hav_eriV_Distri9F-.i._ . j .. Appellant\n(By Sri Harsh iDe_siai_, ., \n\nAnd: i V i i i\n\n i?aneberihiJ\u00a7ii Taluka Elitiiiiication Society'\n\n'Rep1fesented\u00abbyiVitsi Chairman\n\nVenkappa_Kris'hnappa Savakar\nR \/ 0 Rar3.ebe11t"1_~zir','T;E?\u00a3aVeri District\n\nVj 2 .v Shreeshliaila agadguru Umapathi\n Pnaditaradhya Shiva Charya Mahaswarnigalu\n f~"Seh.1\ufb02'eeshai1a, Andhra Pradesh .. Respondents<\/pre>\n
iK’.I.Ji.Patii, Sri S.S.Beturmath and R.S.Hegde, Advocate for<\/p>\n
$7
\nin<\/p>\n
. This regular first appeal is \ufb01led u\/s 96 CPC against the
\njudgment and decree dt. 03.11.2003 passed in OS No.2\/20’Q2e.on<\/p>\n
the file of the Addl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Ranebennur, diS1:I}l_S”\u20ac~’.171;1g<\/p>\n
the suit for declaration and possession and etc.<\/p>\n
This appeal coming on for hearing this day, J3.,*i  1 <\/p>\n
delivered the following:   _<\/p>\n
JGDGMENT<\/p>\n
The appellant is the unsuccessful plai’1n.tiff.. _ ‘iThe’v\u00ab:.’ap.pe1–iant v 1’<\/p>\n
instituted suit os No.2 of 2002 beigfe-.t:tttt-;_V_ cii}i1~Jti_dg\u00a2f% (Senior<\/p>\n
Division), Ranebennur against\u00ab–_ti’1eA ir_espbo\u00bbnde’n-t:s’tfor the following<\/p>\n
prayer:   i
\nTo grant a   fglift””‘dated 03.10.1999<\/p>\n
executed by the 1st   Qsdlldelfendant as null and void
\nand to direct\ufb01the  the possession of the
\nschedule property. ”  averments, the plaintiff
\nwas the absolute  of .922iiacr:es and one gunta of land situated
\n a.t’.Ranebennu’ritown and she gifted the entire extent<\/p>\n
of acregslliigunta of land in favour of the 13′ defendant<\/p>\n
iuivider a lgiftldeedlldlated 03.10.1966 with a specific condition that<\/p>\n
. entire ext’cI1t:.of land gifted by her to the 1st defendant–Society<\/p>\n
 ‘shall only for the educational institution run by the 19\u00a2<\/p>\n
it dfefendanit. According to the plaint averrnents, contrary to the<\/p>\n
\/ .\n<\/p>\n
ti\/’<\/p>\n
terms and conditions of the gift deed dated 03.10.1966, the 1st
\ndefendant herein has executed a gift deed to an extent of 3 acres of<\/p>\n
land in favour of the 2136 defendant under a gift deed ‘dated<\/p>\n
22.10.1999 to enable the 2nd defendant to construcfval.f}::e!15*\u00a3’sfi<\/p>\n
rnantap. Contending that the action of the 15* defen_da:nt   9 <\/p>\n
a portion of the land gifted to the 19′ defendant :bly’__tl5\u00a7e’ <\/p>\n
favour of the 2nd defendant as nullpaeand voidllg suitlvivas fi1edfo=:l”g<\/p>\n
declaring the execution of the gift  tl’V1b~.:1’V5t’ jdefendlant in
\nfavour of the 2nd defendant nu_il’lland:’.voiidp andlto direct the
\ndefendants to put the plaintiff  same. The 1st<\/p>\n
defendant    ifthe 2nd defendant<\/p>\n
remained      the execution of the
\ngift deed to  entire’exte.ntof by the plaintiff in favour of it.
\nBut the Istgdefendantl  deiniedlthat the entire extent of land has\n<\/p>\n
 –use’d fo~z1peducati’onlal purpose. It is also denied that the<\/p>\n
giftdeed’adated..22l.l10:.li.999 executed by the 1st defendant in favour<\/p>\n
 the ;ir;q_4ldefevndanti::is illegal and Without any authority of law. It<\/p>\n
~ .i.i’_j”gvas’ also contended that there is no cause of action for the suit and<\/p>\n
{~.l_lpth.ecause of action is based on the court fee paid by the<\/p>\n
9. lffplaintiff is inadequate and the plaintiff has to pay court fee based<\/p>\n
‘S?\/\/,.\/’ ‘<\/p>\n
on the market value of the property. The 15′ defendant also denied
\nthat the person who has signed and veri\ufb01ed the plaint as power of<\/p>\n
attorney holder is not the real power of attorney holder. ItV.is_:als_o<\/p>\n
contended that the gift deed executed by the 13’: <\/p>\n
favour of the 2nd defendant cannot be cancelled and ”  <\/p>\n
has no right to seek possession of the <\/p>\n
above pleadings the following issuesgwe\u00e9re framed by   court;<\/p>\n
“1. Whether the plaintiff provesVi’e’that the if ~1$i”deft..ii’l;)y
\nviolating the conditionsofzgift deeds  10. i966 has
\ngifted the suit property”–  il5li,’j!1jnd_ deft. on
\n22.10.1999?\n<\/p>\n
2. Whether”  proves. gift deed<\/p>\n
dtd.22._r0;’1999}:is  air1d;”voidl?i_’i”””\n<\/p>\n
3. Whetherrthe  to possession of the
\nsuit properl,y?. i V ‘V\n<\/p>\n
4. Whether the suit. is hzirr\u00e9d by limitation?
\n V. _5.  the coi1rt..__fe.e paid is sufficient?<\/p>\n
  What_vor.der”o.r decree?”\n<\/p>\n
2.” ln’–.ord:ierl7.to prove the respective contentions on behalf of<\/p>\n
i’7’the plaintiff on’eaPrakash Naik who is the power of attorney holder<\/p>\n
.:  rplaintiffiiwas got examined as PW1. He relied upon Ex.P1 to<\/p>\n
 of the defendants no evidence was let in. The trial<\/p>\n
“after considering the entire evidence and hearing the<\/p>\n
{Q}\/\/’ i<\/p>\n
ANOTHER VS. RAMESH CHANDRA reported in AIR 2001 SC 2340
\nand in the case of STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. BANS} DHAR<\/p>\n
AND OTHERS reported in AIR 1974 SC 1084. Relying uponitithese<\/p>\n
two decisions, he contends that the trial court has corrirnittc.d  <\/p>\n
error in not appreciating the true spirit of  ”  <\/p>\n
executing a gift deed in favour of the 15* d\u00e9efendaht on 1:O’.*1 t. e <\/p>\n
4. Per contra, learned counsel.for__the VI =’*?_ respore.l’der1trisubrnits <\/p>\n
that the 15* respondent has not violatedv\u00ab.theuterrns  conditions
\nof the gift deed dated 03. 10.  A-iccQg.rdin.g’ gift deed has
\nbeen executed by the i\u00e9t defendal\ufb01tiriiifatfourvof 2nd defendant<\/p>\n
for the purpose for   bysfthe plaintiff to the<\/p>\n
is’ defendant\u00bb, Therefore-,,:Vthe\ufb01gifti deed executed by the 13*
\ndefendant in favozirof tlzeidiilmi .d’efendant cannot be construed as
\ncontrary to};  terrn’s=..and_conditions of the gift deed dated<\/p>\n
O3A.’1_0..A19’66.   circumstances, he requests the court to<\/p>\n
‘V 5. heard learned counsel appearing for the parties,<\/p>\n
;  toconvsider the following two points in this appeal:<\/p>\n
\u00bb-\n<\/p>\n
<,,:_\/..\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
(i) Whether the plaintiff can maintain a suit seeking for
\ndeclaration to declare the gift deed executed by the 13*
\ndefendant in favour of the 2nd defendant as <\/p>\n
void?\n<\/p>\n
(ii) Whether the plaintiff is entitied for posse.issioin~i.:of.the”  <\/p>\n
suit property’?\n<\/p>\n
Regarding Point No.[i):\n<\/p>\n
As stated supra, in order to provetthe _respie(:teivecontentions
\nof the parties, the plaintiff hzy\u00e9psg-e1i–i_5’d }.1po..r_1nthe evidence of one<\/p>\n
Prakash N aik who is none other\ufb02than ippovver ‘eifattorney holder.<\/p>\n
PW1 is none other than};.t..il’1e younger b’rotlie’r..o.f the plaintiff. He<\/p>\n
has produced\u00bb, of ‘ attorney executed by the
\nplaintiff. Ex.P2″1e giftiiiidieedidated 03.10.1966. Ex.P3 is the
\ncertified  of the iigiftivideed executed by the 13* defendant in<\/p>\n
faveur.iof\u00ab -defendant. EX.P-4 is the certi\ufb01ed copy of the<\/p>\n
 recordfiof  the certi\ufb01ed copy of the order passed by<\/p>\n
i71*pthe_Reveni;1e Shireistedar of Ranebennur. Except these five<\/p>\n
 noother documents are produced by the plaintiff and<\/p>\n
 docurnents are aiso produced by the defendants. The execution<\/p>\n
  of deed dated on 03.10.1966 in favour of the ls defendant<\/p>\n
32\/<\/p>\n
by the plaintiff is not in dispute. As a matter of fact, defendant<\/p>\n
No.1 admits the purpose for which the land in question b_ee.n<\/p>\n
N<\/p>\n
gifted by the plaintiff to the defendant No.1. <\/p>\n
perused Ex.P2. It is recited under Ex.P2 Jthat in orderiito run’ the <\/p>\n
educational institution the entire extent of._22:;’acres’eand one <\/p>\n
of land has been gifted to the 13* defendantl the pa  <\/p>\n
valuable land situated within the Ranebennur toiirn <\/p>\n
6. From the reading of    that the land
\nhas been gifted by the p_laintiff..in:._favouAr:iof”.thelilftdefendant only
\nfor the purpose of  educlatilonialiinstitution for children<\/p>\n
and Ex.P2 does  enableithe._:l’i$iV’t_d.et%2-zidantl to use the land gifted<\/p>\n
to it by the plaintiff “purpose other than running the<\/p>\n
educational institution.\n<\/p>\n
if V’  7.  the certified copy of the gift deed executed by the<\/p>\n
15* defendant  the 25″‘ defendant. The execution of the<\/p>\n
libessaid docu_rnent_ iseilialso not in dispute as the 1st defendant has<\/p>\n
..i_:adniitted the execution of the same. From the contents of the<\/p>\n
f_’clocunientil’E_x.P3 it is clear to us that 3 acres of land out 22 acres<\/p>\n
V”  gunta of land gifted by the plaintiff to the 18* defendant<\/p>\n
(Q)\/..\n<\/p>\n
has been gifted by the IS’ defendant to the 21″? defendant inorder<\/p>\n
to construct a kalyan mantap and also to establish a <\/p>\n
school and for other purposes. Therefore, the <\/p>\n
considered by us in this appeal is whether.,,tl_1_\u20ac: eiiiecutedv <\/p>\n
by the plaintiff in favour of the 13′ defendant <\/p>\n
defendant to deal with the property in any’-nianynerviiitjlikttps and <\/p>\n
whether any restrictions are imposed”-o:n ,the defenidant in
\nregard to use of the gifted property’.  eonsiidering the recitals
\nof Ex.P2 we are of the Aview  only for the
\npurpose of running_Va__n   the 1st defendant
\nand it has no po\\2ver    vye consider that EX.P3
\nempowers   a Sanskrit school and
\nother educational from kalyan mantap, when the
\n13* defendant hasfiifnoi sL1ehi”‘poi5r.er of alienation, but the Ex.P3<\/p>\n
\u20acX\u00e9iv<3f11f\u20acd 215* defenda'n't in favour of the 2"" defendant has to<\/p>\n
be held  the 13* defendant was not empowered to<\/p>\n
 the property. 'e.e_ the 13* defendant was required to utilise the<\/p>\n
"extent "of 22 acres and one gunta of land for the purpose for<\/p>\n
 f\u00a7;h.ichi"i':_is"gifted by the plaintiff. The judgment relied upon by the<\/p>\n
i" i.appe'l'1ant's counsel would support his case. Therefore, we are of<\/p>\n
\\'"\u00a7;\u00bb\u00abr"\/I I<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
the view that at any rate when there is a violation of the terms and
\nconditions of the gift deed, the plaintiff is entitled to maintain a<\/p>\n
suit for revocation of the gift deed executed by the 15′ defendan:tg:i’n.<<\/p>\n
favour of the 2nd defendant. Accordingly, We answer" their "<\/p>\n
No.(i) in favour of the appellant and againstthe.  <\/p>\n
8. At this stage, the learned counsel appiellant <\/p>\n
as the 15* respondent have \ufb01led a jointarriemo view of
\nthe categorical \ufb01nding of this Court -that the’exe’cution of
\nthe gift deed by the 1st defendantin 2nd defendant<\/p>\n
measuring 3 acres as null__and’ not bind the plaintiff .’<\/p>\n
h n$@$&tmg__tha–t_tl:.e appellant-plaintiff will not
\npress the relief for ‘posisession,  the respondent No.1 has given
\nan undertaking ito.__4utilis’e_ the” entire extent of 22 acres and one<\/p>\n
gunta onlyfor the educationalv institutions run by it. The memo is<\/p>\n
signed by\ufb01tilcviii powueiiof attorney holder of the plaintiff and the<\/p>\n
 Chairman’i.._of t’i’1~i:i$;’\\..v,1ppsiv.i’:fe’spondent, so also by the learned counsel<\/p>\n
iV’.1–gaipipearingifor the “parties. The plaintiffs power of attorney holder<\/p>\n
 Chairman who are present before the Court have been<\/p>\n
 \u00ab.:ideint.if1’ed’byithe respective Advocates and they admit the execution<\/p>\n
of :the…_\u00a7oint memo. The joint memo is taken on record. In view of<\/p>\n
11<\/span><\/p>\n
the join memo, we are of the View that there is no necessity for us<\/p>\n
to consider point No.(ii) formulated by us. In the result, the alidpeal<\/p>\n
is allowed in part. The gift deed executed by the 13′  <\/p>\n
favour of the 2nd defendant on 22.10.1999 is herelziyli\ufb01iecliared’last: _ it <\/p>\n
null and void by setting aside the judgmenthand,decreeily:pia,ssedl”in”.<\/p>\n
os No.2 of 2002 dated 03.11.2003 of the’.Additional_~_tCivi1’~Judged”<\/p>\n
(Senior Division), Ranebennur and it issifyurtherinllin yiew
\nof the joint rrierno filed by the’ appellant:  resfjondt\u00e9nt No.1.
\nrespondent No.1 shall use  only for the
\npurpose of running   further declare
\nthat the 15′ respondeiity   Parties to bear<\/p>\n
their costs.\n<\/p>\n
S\u00e9iei;\n<\/p>\n
Iudgs
\nSdl–Z
\nJudge<\/p>\n
 ,i’==mfg,\/f’  *<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Pushpa @ Malathi vs Ranebennur Taluka Education … on 2 February, 2010 Author: K.L.Manjunath And Kumar IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, CIRCUIT BENCH AT DI-IARWAD. DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF FEBRUARY 2o1o,f_j PRESENT in 3 THE HON’BLE3 MRJUSTICE K.;.,AM;\u00a7NJtr1vA*bij\u00a7: \u00ab AND , . _ 1′ . THE HON’BLE MR. JUsTICE._ARAV1v;\u00a7b […]<\/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-62806","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nPushpa @ Malathi vs Ranebennur Taluka Education ... on 2 February, 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\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Pushpa @ Malathi vs Ranebennur Taluka Education ... on 2 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-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=\"2010-02-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-04-11T20:50:42+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\\\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Pushpa @ Malathi vs Ranebennur Taluka Education … on 2 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-11T20:50:42+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1782,\"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\\\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010\",\"name\":\"Pushpa @ Malathi vs Ranebennur Taluka Education ... on 2 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-11T20:50:42+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Pushpa @ Malathi vs Ranebennur Taluka Education … on 2 February, 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":"Pushpa @ Malathi vs Ranebennur Taluka Education ... on 2 February, 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\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Pushpa @ Malathi vs Ranebennur Taluka Education ... on 2 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-04-11T20:50:42+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\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Pushpa @ Malathi vs Ranebennur Taluka Education … on 2 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-11T20:50:42+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010"},"wordCount":1782,"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\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010","name":"Pushpa @ Malathi vs Ranebennur Taluka Education ... on 2 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-11T20:50:42+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pushpa-malathi-vs-ranebennur-taluka-education-on-2-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Pushpa @ Malathi vs Ranebennur Taluka Education … on 2 February, 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\/62806","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=62806"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62806\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=62806"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=62806"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=62806"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}