{"id":66204,"date":"2008-06-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-06-25T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008"},"modified":"2014-06-29T08:47:02","modified_gmt":"2014-06-29T03:17:02","slug":"m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008","title":{"rendered":"M.S. Natarajan vs Vasudevan on 26 June, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
M.S. Natarajan vs Vasudevan on 26 June, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 7984 of 2008(A)\n\n\n1. M.S. NATARAJAN, S\/O. SANKARAN,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. VASUDEVAN, S\/O. KARUNAKARAN,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH (SR.)\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.ABRAHAM SAMSON\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR\n\n Dated :26\/06\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n                  M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.\n                     ...........................................\n                   WP(C).No. 7984                 OF 2008\n                    ............................................\n         DATED THIS THE             26th       DAY OF JUNE, 2008\n\n                                JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
      Petitioner is the defendant and respondent, the plaintiff in<\/p>\n
O.S.15 of 2007 on the file of Munsiff Court, Ranni. Suit was one<\/p>\n
for injunction. The plaint schedule property belongs to the<\/p>\n
petitioner.  It is a Rubber Estate. Petitioner and respondent<\/p>\n
admittedly entered into an agreement on 12.1.2006, whereunder<\/p>\n
respondent was permitted slaughter tapping of rubber trees for<\/p>\n
two years and thereafter to cut and remove the rubber trees for<\/p>\n
a total consideration of Rs.3,85,000\/-, out of which Rs.1,00,000\/-<\/p>\n
was paid at the time of the agreement and Rs.50,000\/- was to be<\/p>\n
paid on or before 30.1.2006 and out of the remaining balance,<\/p>\n
Rs.1,17,500\/- was to be paid on or before 12.1.2007 and the<\/p>\n
remaining Rs.1,17,500\/- before cutting and removal of the<\/p>\n
rubber trees. Respondent admittedly paid Rs.1,50,000\/-, which<\/p>\n
should have been paid on or before 30.1.2006. But on or before<\/p>\n
12.1.2007, Rs.1,17,500\/- was not paid. According to the<\/p>\n
respondent, he approached petitioner and offered to pay the<\/p>\n
amount in the evening of 12.1.2007, but petitioner refused to<\/p>\n
receive the same. According to petitioner, respondent failed to<\/p>\n
WP(C) 7984\/2008                 2<\/span><\/p>\n
pay the amount and therefore he sent a notice dated 13.1.2007,<\/p>\n
terminating the contract.    The suit was instituted thereafter.<\/p>\n
I.A.113 of 2007 was filed by the respondent under Order XXXIX<\/p>\n
Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, restraining petitioner from<\/p>\n
causing any obstruction to his rubber tapping.<\/p>\n
      2. I.A.194 of 2007 was filed by petitioner seeking an order<\/p>\n
of injunction under Order XXXIX Rule 1 of Code of Civil<\/p>\n
Procedure, restraining respondent from trespass. As per<\/p>\n
common order dated 9.4.2007, learned Munsiff dismissed<\/p>\n
I.A.113 of 2007 holding that remedy of the respondent is to seek<\/p>\n
damages or for specific performance of the contract. Holding<\/p>\n
that respondent is not entitled to conduct slaughter tapping<\/p>\n
subsequent to the termination of the contract, an order of<\/p>\n
injunction was granted in favour of the petitioner. Petitioner<\/p>\n
filed CMA 34 of 2007, challenging the order in I.A.113 of 2007.<\/p>\n
Under Ext.P2 order, learned District Judge set aside the order of<\/p>\n
learned Munsiff in I.A.113 of 2007 and permit respondent to<\/p>\n
deposit Rs.1,17,500\/- within seven days from the date of the<\/p>\n
order holding that if he fails to do so, the order dismissing his<\/p>\n
petition for injunction would stand and on deposit, he is entitled<\/p>\n
to the order of injunction in I.A.113 of 2007. Learned District<\/p>\n
WP(C) 7984\/2008                  3<\/span><\/p>\n
Judge vacated the order in I.A.194 of 2007. Petitioner was also<\/p>\n
directed to pay a cost of Rs.1000\/-. This petition is filed under<\/p>\n
Article 227 of Constitution of India, challenging Ext.P2 order.<\/p>\n
      3. Learned senior counsel appearing for petitioner and<\/p>\n
learned counsel appearing for respondent were heard. Learned<\/p>\n
senior counsel argued that when the agreement between the<\/p>\n
parties was terminated by notice dated 13.1.2007, and learned<\/p>\n
Munsiff rightly found that remedy of respondent is only to claim<\/p>\n
damages and learned District Judge was not justified in granting<\/p>\n
an order in favour of respondent and that too, by permitting<\/p>\n
respondent to deposit Rs.1,17,500\/- within seven days from the<\/p>\n
date of that order. It was argued that by the said order, District<\/p>\n
Court has created a new contract between the parties, without<\/p>\n
the consent of the petitioner and Ext.P2 order is to be quashed.<\/p>\n
Learned senior counsel also pointed out that petitioner should<\/p>\n
have filed two separate appeals challenging the orders in two<\/p>\n
applications and CMA 34 of 2007 could only be treated as an<\/p>\n
appeal against the order in I.A.113 of 2007 and if so as the order<\/p>\n
in I.A.194 of 2007 was not separately challenged, that order<\/p>\n
would operate as res judicata in challenging the order in I.A.113<\/p>\n
of 2007.\n<\/p>\n
WP(C) 7984\/2008                  4<\/span><\/p>\n
     4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent argued that<\/p>\n
the contract is not for any personal service but to enable<\/p>\n
respondent slaughter tapping for two years and thereafter to<\/p>\n
cut and remove rubber trees and respondent has performed his<\/p>\n
part of the contract and even though respondent was prepared to<\/p>\n
pay the amount due on 12.1.2007, petitioner did not receive the<\/p>\n
same and after 12.1.2007, a notice was sent by respondent,<\/p>\n
terminating the contract, which is invalid and therefore<\/p>\n
respondent is entitled to enjoy the benefit available to him under<\/p>\n
the contract and learned District Judge rightly permitted<\/p>\n
respondent to enjoy the benefit under Ext.P2 reasoned order and<\/p>\n
it cannot be interfered by this court in exercise of the powers of<\/p>\n
this court under Article 227 of Constitution of India. Learned<\/p>\n
counsel also argued that respondent has deposited Rs.1,17,500\/-<\/p>\n
as directed by District Judge and claim for damages cannot be an<\/p>\n
appropriate remedy for respondent as damages cannot be<\/p>\n
quantified as value of the rubber is fluctuating and in such<\/p>\n
circumstances, there is no reason to interfere with Ext.P2 order.<\/p>\n
     5. The agreement admittedly executed by the parties on<\/p>\n
12.1.2006 permits respondent to slaughter tap the rubber trees<\/p>\n
for two years and thereafter to cut and remove the rubber trees.<\/p>\n
WP(C) 7984\/2008                  5<\/span><\/p>\n
But that privilege was given to respondent, subject to the<\/p>\n
payment of the amount provided thereunder.            Admittedly<\/p>\n
respondent paid Rs.1,00,000\/- on the date of execution of the<\/p>\n
agreement and also paid Rs.50,000\/-, which is to be paid on or<\/p>\n
before    30.1.2006.     Admittedly,     second   instalment   of<\/p>\n
Rs.1,17,500\/-, which should have been paid on or before<\/p>\n
12.1.2007 was not paid. There is a dispute whether respondent<\/p>\n
offered to pay the same in the evening of 12.1.2007 as claimed<\/p>\n
by respondent or respondent failed to pay the amount at all. That<\/p>\n
is a matter which can be decided in the suit and that too on<\/p>\n
evidence. Whatever be the case, it is admitted case that there<\/p>\n
was no payment of Rs.1,17,500\/- as provided under the<\/p>\n
agreement on or before 12.1.1007. It is also admitted case that<\/p>\n
thereafter, petitioner sent a notice, terminating the contract as<\/p>\n
per notice dated 13.1.2007. The question of validity of notice is<\/p>\n
also not to be decided at this stage. The question is what is the<\/p>\n
remedy of the respondent, who was permitted slaughter tapping<\/p>\n
of rubber trees for two years and had to cut and remove the<\/p>\n
rubber trees thereafter. As per the contract period of agreement<\/p>\n
is from 12.1.2006 to 12.1.2008. Even that period expired<\/p>\n
subsequent to the filing of the suit. In such circumstances, the<\/p>\n
WP(C) 7984\/2008                 6<\/span><\/p>\n
question whether respondent is to be permitted to cut and<\/p>\n
remove the trees as it would be the consequence if Ext.P2 order<\/p>\n
is to be    upheld. When a contract is broken, respondent is<\/p>\n
entitled to claim damages. I cannot agree with the submission of<\/p>\n
learned counsel that there is no possibility of quantifying the<\/p>\n
damages, if any. In such circumstances, as found by the learned<\/p>\n
Munsiff, remedy of respondent is to claim damages. He cannot<\/p>\n
be permitted to cut and remove the trees at this stage. Ext.P2<\/p>\n
order is therefore quashed.    Consequently respondent is not<\/p>\n
entitled to trespass into the property or slaughter tap rubber<\/p>\n
trees or to cut and remove the trees as sought for. Respondent<\/p>\n
is at liberty to withdraw the amount deposited before the court,<\/p>\n
if so advised or to claim damages, if he is otherwise entitled to.<\/p>\n
                            M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE<\/p>\n
lgk\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court M.S. Natarajan vs Vasudevan on 26 June, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 7984 of 2008(A) 1. M.S. NATARAJAN, S\/O. SANKARAN, … Petitioner Vs 1. VASUDEVAN, S\/O. KARUNAKARAN, … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH (SR.) For Respondent :SRI.ABRAHAM SAMSON The Hon’ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR Dated :26\/06\/2008 O R […]<\/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-66204","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nM.S. Natarajan vs Vasudevan on 26 June, 2008 - 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\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M.S. Natarajan vs Vasudevan on 26 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-06-25T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-06-29T03:17:02+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M.S. Natarajan vs Vasudevan on 26 June, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-29T03:17:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1188,\"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\\\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008\",\"name\":\"M.S. Natarajan vs Vasudevan on 26 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-29T03:17:02+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M.S. Natarajan vs Vasudevan on 26 June, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/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. Natarajan vs Vasudevan on 26 June, 2008 - 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\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M.S. Natarajan vs Vasudevan on 26 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-06-25T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-06-29T03:17:02+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M.S. Natarajan vs Vasudevan on 26 June, 2008","datePublished":"2008-06-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-29T03:17:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008"},"wordCount":1188,"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\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008","name":"M.S. Natarajan vs Vasudevan on 26 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-06-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-29T03:17:02+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-s-natarajan-vs-vasudevan-on-26-june-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M.S. Natarajan vs Vasudevan on 26 June, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/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\/66204","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=66204"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66204\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66204"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66204"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66204"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}