{"id":6565,"date":"2010-12-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-12-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010"},"modified":"2018-07-02T20:50:19","modified_gmt":"2018-07-02T15:20:19","slug":"ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010","title":{"rendered":"M\/S.A B N A vs Sri Jayadeva Institute Of … on 28 December, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
M\/S.A B N A vs Sri Jayadeva Institute Of … on 28 December, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE 28\"' DAY OF DECEMBER, 2010fTP.\n\nBEFORE\n\nTHE HON'Bi_E MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPA!=.A',_\"GO\\AjOA_ 3\n\nWRIT PETITION NO.34646\/\"iO1'G'(.e--M--ePt:')E'-_,_:\"7'__ \n\nBETWEEN:\n\nM\/s. A.B.N.A. \nNo.184- A & B, Patparganj viHag_e\"._ \nMain Market, Patparganj,~..V_  \" \nNew Delhi ~ 110 091, \"  _ -_ \nRepresented by its Propriet-rix  *\nSmt. Vidushi A Banerjee-~--.:j  v_ \u00abV \nRepresented by <\u00a7Ter:'{3.P$._A. :.H.O'Jder"*  \nSri Anurup Bar\u00e9,erjee_'. . ' ' _ .  \nAged abOut=t53 yea"r"s',l._ b   V.\n\nS\/O. late Shri-.A}D1;.;5anerjee"-- *  \nResiding 'at' C;ii:2~F,"?~De!h'i~.P'oIice Apartments\nMayur Vihar.Pha--SeV._-"L. *  ~ f\n\nNew Delhi 4\u00bb r11O.09t;.V'Ir.. \n\n_  '     PETITIONER\n(By Vsri 'S;.D.N. Pr~a\ufb02S'ad, Adv.)\n\nAfiri 'J'a\\\/Eade"ve_ Ir.iVvsti'tute of Cardioiogy,\n\nGurup'pan_a"Pa_Fya,\nBann"erag'hatt'a road,\n\nEaaangaloretr 560 069\n\n VLVRer3,reser:*ted by its Director,\n\n ._'(S_ri'-KJM.Basavaraj, Adv.)\n\n RESPONDENT<\/pre>\n
ix”)<\/p>\n
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227
\nof the Constitution of India, praying to quash the
\nimpugned order passed by the XXVI Additional City Civii &
\nSessions Judge (CCH No.20), Mayo Half, Bangalore-,_io_n<\/p>\n
LAJVolI,En CLSJ\ufb02L16185\/2003 dated 3oxs2Qio,-vmen
\nAnnexure — F and consequentiy aliow the said a_p:p|ica’tijjo.nf.  ‘ .<\/p>\n
This petition having been reserved:”t’h=is:~’..dav, 0′<\/p>\n
Court made the foilowingz
\nORDERZC<\/p>\n
The petitioner is the  and  is
\nthe defendant in 0.5 i\\lo…16185\/200:3’upendinagjon the fiie of
\nCity Civil Court, Bangaii\u00e9oref  passing of a
\ndecree for reiciy\/.,:’6:’:fy   interest and
\nCOS5tS. By::”on 05.02.2004, the
\nrespondent; suit. Based on the rnateriai
\npleadings,’issuesx’vxie’re  and the suit was posted for
\nwart”: A V 0 C
\n_s; 2 f~ eeunonerrnedi A No.2(N127.11.2009 seemng<\/p>\n
p’e,r.n1ii’ssivoniefipthe court to amend the piaint, to incorporate<\/p>\n
‘.Vthe44″p,roposed piea and the additionat prayer. The<\/p>\n
 “..\ufb02..res0p’o,nde’nt fiied its statement of objections to LA No.2 on<\/p>\n
  Finding I.A No.2 to be devoid of merit, the<\/p>\n
\/,..\n<\/p>\n
trial court has rejected the same. Feeling aggrieved, the<\/p>\n
piaintiff has fiied this writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
3. Sri S.D.N.Prasad, learned advocate\u00a7’_”?3’lJ’i95i?tl’!V’l”!it?1:_’_<\/p>\n
for the petitioner contended that, LA b.eeri”  <\/p>\n
considered in the correct perspectiye 1?-‘;,’\u00a7he’–,tr.l4a_l.’<\/p>\n
the order of rejection pas_sed,V’K.i_n” the\u00bb”‘V’%’fa,cts  <\/p>\n
circumstances of the case, is irta’t.i_oriaVl and-illegal.z:f\u00a7Learned
\ncounsel further contende\ufb02 _tt–i_a.t,,–“.al” :m_e,,et\u00abi.n_g waslarranged
\nby the respondent  the suit, in
\nwhich, the   distributor has
\nsuppiied”th’ellgciodsifin of the MOU and hence,
\nto avoid.’rritiltipilicintyuof\u00e9lupitoceedings the application was<\/p>\n
flied, which”-\u00abought’toA7.hax.re been allowed and the piaintiff<\/p>\n
 .__bei:i,g”\u00a2.pe_tn1E,ttedtovivnrxarporate the proposed amendment in<\/p>\n
” I4. V.  K,M.Basavaraj, iearned counsel appearing<\/p>\n
 th’e__Ai-espondent on the other hand by taking me<\/p>\n
..,’f”;iw.r_oti’igh the objection filed to LA No.2 contended that the<\/p>\n
 affidavit in support of LA No.2 is bald and that, LA No.2<\/p>\n
w’\/Lg’<\/p>\n
was filed long after the issues were framed and tthesdit<\/p>\n
was posted for trial. Learned counsel subrnitted th.a_t~._.the<\/p>\n
proviso appended to Rule 17 of Order 6 CPC<\/p>\n
and hence the amendment was hirightiy  <\/p>\n
Learned counsel pointed out that,’\u00bbr.thei;”‘su:itwas <\/p>\n
on 15.09.2003 and LA No.2’w’a-s_.fiied’r.on 27.’17ii;r.:;.jo–o9
\nthe proposed amendment  above
\nthe amount claimed in Vt’ii.e”S_Ui’\u00e9t,  interest from
\nthe date of suit is. exmfac-ierbiarrvecigoir.”i_irn:’itvation. Learned
\ncounsei su  the  introduces
\na new case \u20aca~Vnd::-a\ufb02new  and hence the trial
\ncou rt was \ufb01~g!I.:A No . 2.\n<\/p>\n
5. ‘$553.! fiiing. IALAS ‘No.2, the petitioner proposed to<\/p>\n
 ..inco.;\u20ac%p\u00a7’orgii;e the foVi’iow\u00e9~n’g amendment in the plaintz<\/p>\n
V  *’r’If’\u00e9=n7r’1″i’\u00a7'(3  : Thai ai’i.e1′ the ir.’1.si.it.ui.icm of the above
\n .’ i[ij1t_-‘,  had a1’1\u00b0a11goc1 21 11’1CL’*.i1’11g to sort out
\n‘~._E1c1c,__risgcauct amicably and sevor2.11 meei,i11gs took piacc in
\n1iii,S_A’1~ c()1c111ecE.i()1’1. I)L1n’11g’ the said meeE.ings, the<\/p>\n
it ‘t”wp121i1’1’i.iI’i’ Cl\u00e9lfll\ufb01f to know that M\/s.Shak.ur1 Dist\ufb02buiors
\n has i~’;1.1pp1ied goods in cor1t.r2.1ve1’1tion of M\u20acII}()TEt1’1dL111}
\nof LJ11cie1’siz-u’1di1’1g;\u00a7 ciaieci 26\/27–O7\u00a52OOI a111ou11i.ing to<\/p>\n
it<\/p>\n
‘\/\u00bb-I””<\/p>\n
\/<\/p>\n
Rs.273600\/-. In View of the fact that M\/s.ShakuI1
\nI’)ist’.1’ib1.1t01’s by v1’I’tL1.e of the af()1’esaid M.O.U had
\n1’e11’1’1q_1.1ie}’1ed their 1’ight. the SL.1pp1it’,d had to be made<\/p>\n
by the plaintiff and M\/S.ShE1kl1I1 Dist1’1’bu101’s \\-vas”‘cJ\u00a7111y<\/p>\n
elniiled 10 5% of the e011’1n’1issi0u on the st;:;\u00a7’p.I_i'<-':–s<\/p>\n
made. As M\/s.ShakL.m Dis'11'i.b'L1t01's __E;i'i1'Ci-\u00ab.f_'m__ad.;\u00e9__' _<\/p>\n
sL.1pp}ies in (:0nt1'aven1'i011 of the 'LVE.O '.'U  iii\u00bb<\/p>\n
c0I1nivz111c:e with the deft-m.d21I}–\ufb01:,'"'t.he p1\u00e9:inti1'fe1iI:r;i{ied7.<\/p>\n
for the said sum and the plailltil?is'e1'iet.i_t.1'ed"'fox <\/p>\n
the same f1'01'I1 the def'e1e1V(1'a._1'ai.<\/p>\n
(02) In prayer e01Lu11:1: –  pra1yei'–[gt_:gi] ':afte;1' prayer
\n{a} andbefore p1'a3,r'e::V_{b}    _ t t <\/p>\n
"[ae1} directt the I)efen't:iaa1'tnttjepiaintiff 3. sum
\nof Rs.25992.O\/A   Thousand<\/p>\n
Ntt1\u20ac  ottly} together with interest<\/p>\n
@"24'%_ E:)1;:'_l-vV:r:I;.(-V).'1"}.:'1V 'e\u00bb:.}\u00a7:stA..g1':,_1,e or the Suit ml the date or<\/p>\n
ree1li\u00e93':x.'ti.()11". V' _<\/p>\n
 [_<eepA'i"r'1g-…i.n.\u00abview the rival contentions and the<\/p>\n
res:6".'d_0'f_the\u00ab-\ufb01riit petition, which I have perused, the point<\/p>\n
for .<.:\u20ac1vrisitief}E3tiVr\u00a7'rVrV is:\n<\/p>\n
 Whether the triai court was justifiea’ in<\/p>\n
rejecting LA No.2 ?\n<\/p>\n
H7. Indisputedly, the Suit was filed on 15.09.2003<\/p>\n
 the written statement contesting the suEt claim was<\/p>\n
6<\/span><\/p>\n
filed on 05.02.2004. Issues were framed and the suit-was<\/p>\n
posted for trial. LA No.2 was filed on 27.11.200-9″.’-~..f”jfh’e,,<\/p>\n
proviso appended to Rule 17 of Order 6 CPC ”\n<\/p>\n
that, no application for amendmentrshaipl  a’fter’.,, 00<\/p>\n
the commencement of trial, uniess”thea.c0’urt0’Co’mes_tcith\u00e9=.<\/p>\n
conclusion that inspite of due\u00bbd,i_i’igence”the’pVar’=ty’:c0’ui’d’not ” 0<\/p>\n
have raised the matter ,_beforeq,.t.he'”com.rnen’cement’\u00a7of trial.
\nWhether a party has acted’ d’ii.if_ge:nrc_e or not would<\/p>\n
depend upon thefacts andcircurri\u00abstaVnces,.of each case.<\/p>\n
8.  cause of action for
\nthe suit”arose:’:.with:\u00a7t’iie:”‘pu’rchase””order dated 25.06.2001
\nbeing piacied ‘i’.vi:_;:.;c;rp\u00a7):’n.dent and an invoice being<\/p>\n
raisedby ‘the ‘vper;m5n_er~~–“00on 09.08.2001. The invoice<\/p>\n
  Rs.96,A0’00–}’——\u00ab.”Interest at 24% has been claimed<\/p>\n
“0,9′.v.08..2’0:0;i..tin 14.09.2003 i.e., a day prior to the<\/p>\n
date’ fiiindofirilthe suit. To the said sum, there is addition<\/p>\n
‘of iegai. notice charges and damages. Thus, the suit was<\/p>\n
A {0fiiedio_.r recovery of Rs.1,49,002\/~ together with interest at<\/p>\n
 .___””.”24″?\/o p.a from the date of suit til! realization. The affidavit<\/p>\n
\/’<\/p>\n
,6<\/p>\n
in support of LA No.2 is paid. The date on which the<\/p>\n
alleged meeting took piace after institution of the su’i’t”‘has<\/p>\n
not been stated. The respondent has <\/p>\n
meeting having taken place. No material is tnyvitth’<\/p>\n
regard to the any meeting have <\/p>\n
taken place between the parties i.e.,’afte.r filing-“.i.ol.’v’tt\u00a7e sjuit. 0<\/p>\n
As against the claim of Rs’.”1,E49_.002\/\u00a5,.V_  Vpetvittioner
\nproposed to claim Rs.2,:S~~9_,92_\u00ab0.\/He wiithtiiinterest at
\n24% p.a from the date   realization.\n<\/p>\n
The amendmentpro-pos=ed  by limitation,<\/p>\n
since the \ufb01I’e’;rii:v..””c>n.”..–i”5″.,.oV9.2oo3 and written<\/p>\n
statement  was filed on 05.02.2004 and<\/p>\n
LA No.2 w’a,_sllfi_ieVd _o”m:y\u00bb-  27.11.2009. An amendment,<\/p>\n
 whichiis ex–faci’e”.b.arred: by limitation, that too in respect of<\/p>\n
  inoneyi cl,e.–l.m”~-has rightly been not permitted.<\/p>\n
 V”7Tjhe’VVclaim made in the suit and the one<\/p>\n
‘.Vpropo’sedV.inVI.A No.2 are distinct and separate. The case<\/p>\n
V’ “..fstat;e’d_in” the piaint and the proposed amendment in LA<\/p>\n
‘\u00abt\u00ab’-‘NAo..2″being different, there is variance in the cause of<\/p>\n
M;\n<\/p>\n
action. The proposed plea and ciaim in LA 2 introduces a<\/p>\n
new case and a new cause of action. The petitio.ner”g’*has.<\/p>\n
faiied to estabiish due diligence. The  ”\n<\/p>\n
taken prompt steps in the matter..:*r*\u00a3.\u00bbA4ANo_4.2  teen.’<\/p>\n
filed after commencement of triaigin  <\/p>\n
of diligence has rightly been-_rgej.ected” by’thetVr’ii.ai”’co’urt. ” V<\/p>\n
The delay and iaches onthe  the petiitioneriiin fiiing
\nLA No.2 has not been  T4 V ‘A<\/p>\n
10. By:.Vf.i!i;ng.   is seeking a
\nhigher  in the suit. The
\npetitione-r”is.’c:I’nim;i’:r;:.g’–interest ‘a’t’~2’2;i\u00b0\/o p.a on the amount
\nproposeidgin  date of filing of the suit tiii<\/p>\n
the date orregaiizationi’whieh shows that cause of action for<\/p>\n
.–_the _ahnount_VcIaim’ed.___.i_n’ LA No.2 has not arisen after the<\/p>\n
V”-__da.te’ of .’i_i4i’ng;’\u00abo:f’t.he suit. There is ex–facie bar of limitation<\/p>\n
to”thei’amou”r’a:tVgciaimed in LA No.2. In the circumstances, I<\/p>\n
[do not ..fi”n.d.Vaxny ground for interference in the impugned<\/p>\n
 “..forder.\u00ab.._ The impugned order is neither irrationai nor iiiegai<\/p>\n
iheing interfered with in the supervisory writ<\/p>\n
~..;:ju’riscfiction.\n<\/p>\n
,,.\u00a5<\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition faiis and<\/p>\n
the same is dismissed. l\\io costs.\n<\/p>\n
The suit being one for passing of a <\/p>\n
pleadings being compiete and the suit being.’at’ ,st’ag’eVo\u00a3i <\/p>\n
triai, the trial court is directed  d;eci.deA’the F3′.l!;tV:”V\\1’i1fii3j_’<\/p>\n
utmost expedition and at anyiv_e’:I_ent ‘withing ai7per\u00a7io.d_of3six <\/p>\n
months.\n<\/p>\n
To facilitate the t’i”i’aieico’u__rt{–.’tvo “\u00a2ie’jicide. the suit within
\nthe time aliowedgthe p\u00a7et’iti’ori:er.’sh:a~li addzuce and complete<\/p>\n
its side of evidenice_g’__w’ith_i.n1’two: rrionthsiiifrom today. The<\/p>\n
respondent shat! ia’d’diij.g;e  coimpleteiyiiwts side of evidence
\nwithin two mointwhs from”‘t”h’e:’d~at’e\u00ab.t*ne plaintiff’s closes its
\nside of evidence. iiieftri.a”.i– coiurthshall hear the arguments<\/p>\n
aljl\ufb02sVd’e’Ei’d\u00e9”.E:hE”.-Suit y&vithin’t’h”etime indicated supra.<\/p>\n
\u00a7\u00a7;’~
\n3338?:<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court M\/S.A B N A vs Sri Jayadeva Institute Of … on 28 December, 2010 Author: A.N.Venugopala Gowda IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 28″‘ DAY OF DECEMBER, 2010fTP. BEFORE THE HON’Bi_E MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPA!=.A’,_”GO\\AjOA_ 3 WRIT PETITION NO.34646\/”iO1’G'(.e–M–ePt:’)E’-_,_:”7’__ BETWEEN: M\/s. A.B.N.A. No.184- A & B, Patparganj […]<\/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-6565","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nM\/S.A B N A vs Sri Jayadeva Institute Of ... on 28 December, 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\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S.A B N A vs Sri Jayadeva Institute Of ... on 28 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-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=\"2010-12-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-07-02T15:20:19+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\\\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S.A B N A vs Sri Jayadeva Institute Of … on 28 December, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-02T15:20:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1662,\"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\\\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S.A B N A vs Sri Jayadeva Institute Of ... on 28 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-02T15:20:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S.A B N A vs Sri Jayadeva Institute Of … on 28 December, 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":"M\/S.A B N A vs Sri Jayadeva Institute Of ... on 28 December, 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\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S.A B N A vs Sri Jayadeva Institute Of ... on 28 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-12-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-07-02T15:20:19+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\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S.A B N A vs Sri Jayadeva Institute Of … on 28 December, 2010","datePublished":"2010-12-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-02T15:20:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010"},"wordCount":1662,"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\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010","name":"M\/S.A B N A vs Sri Jayadeva Institute Of ... on 28 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-12-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-02T15:20:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-a-b-n-a-vs-sri-jayadeva-institute-of-on-28-december-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S.A B N A vs Sri Jayadeva Institute Of … on 28 December, 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\/6565","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=6565"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6565\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6565"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6565"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6565"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}