{"id":6809,"date":"1999-03-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1999-03-25T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999"},"modified":"2014-08-03T08:56:05","modified_gmt":"2014-08-03T03:26:05","slug":"s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999","title":{"rendered":"S. Nachimuthu Gounder And Others vs H.B. Nagaraju And Others on 26 March, 1999"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
S. Nachimuthu Gounder And Others vs H.B. Nagaraju And Others on 26 March, 1999<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: ILR 1999 KAR 250, 1999 (6) KarLJ 1<\/div>\n
Author: Y B Rao<\/div>\n
Bench: Y B Rao, A Farooq<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
Y. Bhaskar Rao, C.J.  <\/p>\n
1. This appeal is filed assailing the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition. The brief facts of the case are.–\n<\/p>\n
Respondent 2 who belong to Korama Caste resides in Shagya Village of Kollegal Taluk, Mysore District. He was granted 5 acres 46 cents of land in Sy. Nos. 661\/2C, 661\/3B and 663\/1B vide grant order dated 16-10-1963 with a non-alienation clause. Thereafter, 2nd respondent alienated the land in favour of the appellant. After the commencement of the Karnataka SC\/ST (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978, respondent 2 and his son respondent 1 filed an application for restoration of the land by declaring the sale as null and void. The Assistant Commissioner, after issuing notice to the appellant and after conducting an enquiry allowed the application and ordered restoration of the land. That order was challenged in W.P. No. 16667 of 1973 before this Court on the ground that the grantee was not a member belonging to Scheduled Caste and the Assistant Commissioner failed to record the finding. The writ petition was allowed and the matter was remanded. After remand, the Assistant Commissioner after conducting an enquiry and relying on the certificate issued by the Tahsildar, held that the 2nd respondent belongs to Uppara Korama Shetty Caste which is a Scheduled Caste and therefore, the alienation of the land granted to him is in violation of the prohibition clause and is violative of the grant rules and the same is null and void under Section 4 of the Act. Against that order, an appeal was filed before the 3rd respondent-Deputy Commissioner who confirmed the order of the Assistant Commissioner. Hence, the writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
2. Learned Single Judge after considering the rival contentions, dismissed the writ petition. Against that, the present appeal is filed.\n<\/p>\n
3. Learned Counsel for the appellant firstly contended that Uppara Korama Caste is not the same as Korama Caste and therefore, it is not Scheduled Caste. The Assistant Commissioner after elaborately considering the contentions raised and on the basis of the material on record including the school certificate, has held that the respondents 1 and 2 belong to Scheduled Caste. This finding of the Assistant Commissioner is a pure finding of fact. We do not find any substance in this contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
4. It was secondly contended that the Korama Caste was in the list of enumerated castes of Scheduled Caste published in the year 1950 by the President of India. Later, vide Act 63 of 1956, the earlier order was modified. According to the modified order, different lists are published for different regions in the State. Item 5 of the Schedule relate to South Kanara District and Kollegal Taluk of Mysore District, i.e., the place where respondents 1 and 2 reside. In that list Korama Caste is not shown as one of the Scheduled Castes. The contention is that when on the date of the grant the respondents are not shown as Scheduled Caste persons, they are deemed to be non-Scheduled Caste persons and the alienation made by them is not hit by Section 4 of the Act. Therefore, the question to be considered is to which caste the 1st and 2nd respondents belong in the list published regarding Scheduled Caste in the order of the President of India in 1950 and later list published vide Act 108 of 1976 which came into force on 27-7-1997 in which Korama Caste is shown as one under the Scheduled Caste and whether the 1st and 2nd respondents belong to Scheduled Caste or not at the time when the grant was made. The first order of the President of India is issued vide notification dated 10-8-1950 which was published in the Gazette which is called the Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order of 1950. Korama Caste is shown in the Schedule to the List at Item 6 in the Schedule annexed to the said order concerning Mysore State. Thereafter, vide Act 63 of 1956, a modified order was issued in which Item 5 of the Schedule which relate to South Kanara District and Kollegal Taluk of Mysore District are concerned, Korama Caste is omitted from the list, though this caste is named in the other regions of the State of Karnataka. Afterwards, again vide Amendment Act 108 of 1976 which came into force on 27-7-1997, the Schedule attached to the Presidential order of 1950 is amended and the Korama Caste is shown at Sl. No. 53.\n<\/p>\n
5. At the first instance, President of India issued an order in the year 1950 enlisting different castes as Scheduled Caste\/Scheduled Tribe as per the Constitution provisions. As per Article 341 of the Constitution, the Parliament by amendment, can either add or delete a caste or castes from the list of Scheduled Castes. By virtue of that power, Korama Caste in the I list of Scheduled Castes was deleted from the list concerning Kollegal Taluk of Mysore District. Thereafter, the mistake was realised and again by Amendment Act 108 of 1976, Korama Caste is included in the list of Scheduled Castes. Thus, Korama Caste is in the list of Scheduled Castes before the date of commencement of the Karnataka SC\/ST (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978. Before this Court in a similar case, a question arose whether when a person identified as a Scheduled Caste after the commencement of the SC\/ST Act, 1978 can be said to be not a Scheduled Caste at the time of grant merely on the ground that on the date of the grant he was not a person belonging to Scheduled Caste and whether he will cease to be a person belonging to Scheduled Caste. This question has been elaborately considered by this Court in the case of Krishnappa v State of Karnataka, wherein it is held.–\n<\/p>\n
“Sri K. Shivashankar Bhat, learned Counsel for the petitioner in W.P. No. 7762 of 1980 contended that since clause (d) of Section 3 of the Act defines the term ‘the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes’ as having the meanings respectively assigned to them under the Constitution, the provisions of the Act have no application to alienations of granted lands made prior to the commencement of the Constitution on 26-1-1950. Elaborating this contention, he submitted that the concept of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes came into existence only under the Constitution and that hence the Act could not have intended to invalidate alienations of lands that took place prior to 26-1-1950.\n<\/p>\n
It is true that the terms ‘the Scheduled Castes’ and ‘the Scheduled Tribes’ occurring in the Act, have the meanings assigned to them in the Constitution. That does not mean that castes and tribes which are included in the list of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under the Constitution did not exist prior to the commencement of the Constitution. Most of those castes and tribes were known as Depressed Classes, Harijans, Tribal People and Girijans. If the Government had granted a land to any person belonging to a caste or a tribe which, after the advent of the Constitution, came to be included in the list of Scheduled Castes or the list of Scheduled Tribes, there is no reason why such land should not be regarded as coming within the ambit of the term ‘granted lands’ as defined in clause (b) of Section 3. There is also no reason why the provisions of the Act should not apply to such lands. Thus, we have no hesitation in rejecting the contention of Sri Shivashankar Bhat that alienations of lands
\ngranted prior to 26-1-1950 cannot be invalidated under the Act nor can such lands be resumed”.\n<\/p>\n
6. Thus, the contention that when a caste earlier to the Constitution amendment was not enlisted as Scheduled Caste and therefore, they are not persons belonging to Scheduled Caste is not tenable. Later, the same question again arose for consideration in D.N. Venkatarayappa and Another v State of Karnataka and Others. Learned Single Judge relying on the Division Bench decision cited supra, has followed the same.\n<\/p>\n
7. In the above two decisions, it has been held that the Scheduled Caste persons enumerated in the Constitution are only recognised as Scheduled Caste earlier to the Constitution, It is also found that earlier to the Constitution the said castes were treated as depressed classes by the erstwhile Mysore Government. Therefore, they are deemed to be Scheduled Caste persons on the date of the grant. We affirm the judgment of the learned Single Judge and follow the principle laid down in the Division Bench decision and hold that where a caste is included as a Scheduled Caste in the Constitution or in the list of Scheduled Castes and Schedule of the order issued by the President of India vide amendment by virtue of Article 341 of the Constitution, the said caste will be treated as Scheduled Caste on the date of the grant also. Another reason to follow the said principle is when the grants were made by the then Mysore Government, the condition of non-alienation was imposed for the grant made only to depressed classes. Therefore, that also affirms our view.\n<\/p>\n
8. In view of the above stated circumstances, we hold that respondents 1 and 2 are deemed to be Scheduled Caste persons belonging to Korama Caste on the date of the grant.\n<\/p>\n
9. Learned Counsel for the appellant further contended that there was no opportunity to the appellant to prove that respondents 1 and 2 are not Scheduled Caste persons. No such plea is taken in the petition filed before the Assistant Commissioner.\n<\/p>\n
10. Moreover, the appellant has not disputed that respondents belong to Uppara Korama community which is none other than Korama Caste and when the fact is not denied or disputed, it is deemed to be admitted. Thus, when admittedly the Korama Caste to which respondents 1 and 2 belong are notified as Scheduled Caste before the SC\/ST Act of 1978 came into force, the grant made earlier to them should be deemed to have been made to a Scheduled Caste person.\n<\/p>\n
11. In the result, we do not see any merit in the case. Appeal is dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court S. Nachimuthu Gounder And Others vs H.B. Nagaraju And Others on 26 March, 1999 Equivalent citations: ILR 1999 KAR 250, 1999 (6) KarLJ 1 Author: Y B Rao Bench: Y B Rao, A Farooq JUDGMENT Y. Bhaskar Rao, C.J. 1. This appeal is filed assailing the order of the learned Single Judge […]<\/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-6809","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nS. Nachimuthu Gounder And Others vs H.B. Nagaraju And Others on 26 March, 1999 - 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\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"S. Nachimuthu Gounder And Others vs H.B. Nagaraju And Others on 26 March, 1999 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999\" \/>\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=\"1999-03-25T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-08-03T03:26:05+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"S. Nachimuthu Gounder And Others vs H.B. Nagaraju And Others on 26 March, 1999\",\"datePublished\":\"1999-03-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-08-03T03:26:05+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999\"},\"wordCount\":1704,\"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\\\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999\",\"name\":\"S. Nachimuthu Gounder And Others vs H.B. Nagaraju And Others on 26 March, 1999 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1999-03-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-08-03T03:26:05+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"S. Nachimuthu Gounder And Others vs H.B. Nagaraju And Others on 26 March, 1999\"}]},{\"@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":"S. Nachimuthu Gounder And Others vs H.B. Nagaraju And Others on 26 March, 1999 - 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\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"S. Nachimuthu Gounder And Others vs H.B. Nagaraju And Others on 26 March, 1999 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1999-03-25T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-08-03T03:26:05+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"S. Nachimuthu Gounder And Others vs H.B. Nagaraju And Others on 26 March, 1999","datePublished":"1999-03-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-08-03T03:26:05+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999"},"wordCount":1704,"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\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999","name":"S. Nachimuthu Gounder And Others vs H.B. Nagaraju And Others on 26 March, 1999 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1999-03-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-08-03T03:26:05+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-nachimuthu-gounder-and-others-vs-h-b-nagaraju-and-others-on-26-march-1999#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"S. Nachimuthu Gounder And Others vs H.B. Nagaraju And Others on 26 March, 1999"}]},{"@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\/6809","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=6809"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6809\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6809"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6809"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6809"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}