{"id":73074,"date":"2010-01-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-01-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010"},"modified":"2014-07-01T21:59:04","modified_gmt":"2014-07-01T16:29:04","slug":"smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010","title":{"rendered":"Smt.Muniyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 6 January, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Smt.Muniyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 6 January, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: Manjula Chellur Gowda<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE 6\"\" DAY OF JANUARY, 2010;}:\nPRESENT 'uu\n\nTHE HONBLE MRSJUSTICE MAN3L;LA.Vc}%:'ELL\u00e9j1'R\n&  _ ,  _\n\nTHE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE A.:\\:{vE:'\\';:LJ'L3T%O'r\u00e9_A-:;AA[\u00a7;'OjxA{LO'A__ ']\n\nWRIT APPEAL NOf2683\/42069 (T<vO,A)f " "\nBETWEEN: 'V V V.\n\n1. Smt. iviuraiyamma V   _\u00ab\nAged about 70 yeaE'S,~ - Q  ;\nw\/o. late Sri. Toti Nagappi' :\n\n2. Sri. Muni \u00a7.'ei?a_g\u00e9pa,:=._ _ \nAged a_bouatu 41%}_.y_ear_s,__   _ \nS\/0. Late  Toti \n\nAged' about 33."year.S,'*-._ \nS\/O. late \u00bbSi'i."<TO'{i 'N,_a"g-appa.\n\n4. S\u00a7TT1t..AmVma.,\\{V\\?a'mrTTa\n\/1\\'\u00a7I~'5;*C1 about 4'2~y-ears,\n\n  "D\/O". fLa_t'e,Sri. Toti Nagappa,\n\nV  " W] EL\u00bb AS rinivasa.\n\nA  }3\\All aEe.V'VT'E\u00a7Si'dentS of\n""Sam'pige'hal|i Village,\nBannfzrghatta Post,\n\n ..  Jigawni Hobli, Ar1ei<alTa|uEy Sri. (3. Papa' Reddy, Adv.)\n\nBangaiore District.\n\"  APPELLANTS\n\n\n\n\u00a5~.J\n\nAND:\n\n1 .\n\nState of Karnataka\n\nRevenue Department,\n\nVikas Soudha, Dr.Ambedkar Veedhi,\nBangalore -- 566 801.\n\nThe Tahsiidar,\n\nAnekal Taluk, Anekal,\n\nBahgaiore District.\n\nSmt. Rudramma,\nAged about 61 years,  \nW\/0' Late Sri.ShankaVrapp\u00bba, \"\n\nResident of Sampig'e_hraI_i'i \"a_\/itla'ge\",\"f]-A\n\nBannerghatta Post, Jigani Ffiobii, \n\nAnekaf TaIu1<.,. Bangvari-oreijbistrrct. '\nSri. S.Chaj--:odr;ashekar,7._ "" "\nAged aE5out"'--36'"yeabrs,[j--.c  _ V.\nS\/0. Late.VS'ha.h'\u00a7<arap\u00bbpa',' ~ _ \nRes':'d'er;t,o?:f Sar%::'pig'eh'a!ii ViHag'e,\nBanne_rgha'tta--~Post,V._ - I\n\ufb02iganj Hobi\u00e9, Adeka:.tjca.1gg_.,\nBangaiore Di's.tri"ct'. ,.  '\n\n(By_s'r:. c..T.R.VSr'inV_i'V\\'\/ats, AGA for R1 & R2;\n\n RESPONDENTS<\/pre>\n
  Appeal is fiied under section 4 of the<\/p>\n
 “E?{nV’g.h_i.~Court Act praying to set aside the order<\/p>\n
r5as’s’\u00e9d _.i’.\u00a5.?’:_.7the Writ Petition No.6756\/2008 dated<\/p>\n
-V 24\/’O5.\/;’Qo9″.’<\/p>\n
A Vd”~\u00ab_.”E”his appeai coming on for preiiminary hearing, this<\/p>\n
 “\u00a2\u00a7y,’tvENuGorvALA GOWDA, 3, deiivered the following:<\/p>\n
Lo.)<\/p>\n
JQDQMENT<\/p>\n
Land bearing Survey i\\1o.205 measuring <\/p>\n
guntas situated at Bannerghatta \\\/iliage, <\/p>\n
Anekai Taiuk is a Thoti Service In_a.m,_i,anc3″a’tta–ei:.ed” t’o.Vthe’\u00b0’<\/p>\n
Viiiage Office of Thoti of aannerghattjar~ijiiiag_e’;~ <\/p>\n
iaw of appeliant No.1 and gi’an”d.father~ of appeiia.ri’tvs..2–~3to <\/p>\n
was holding the viiiage  Th.otit_._and2\u00a7 was in
\npossession of said _Thoti Nagappa,
\nhusband of aPP\u00a7!I\u00a7;nt i’\u00e9o’.’t–   o:fgV’.:i\u00a7i’p.peiiants 2 to 4,
\nsucceeded     performing his
\ndiities’t’att’aeh’:ed  the Karnataka Viiiage
\n,{‘the Act’ for short) came into<\/p>\n
operationifan”app!iea.tio\ufb01’nVdated 02.12.1966 was made by<\/p>\n
sav.\u00e9:d\u00a7”:~ ;_i\\J:agi_appaV””-~a–i–ong with his brother Gurappa.<\/p>\n
 ‘husband of respondent No.3 and father of<\/p>\n
.responde’rit”I__Nro.4, had aiso made an appiication for regrant,<\/p>\n
on the. strength of an agreement of saie. The<\/p>\n
 Tiahasildar\/respondent No.2, foiiowing the ratio of iaw iaid<\/p>\n
  ‘down by this Court in the case of LAKSHMAN GOWDA VS.<\/p>\n
2<\/span><\/p>\n
STATE OF KARNATAKA & OTHERS (1981(1) KAR.L.J 1) has<\/p>\n
granted occupancy rights to said Shankarappa by4,aVn\u00bb._o’r.der<\/p>\n
dated 12.07.1984 (Annexure–D to the writ pe_t:’_iti’on..]i;~—-.:<\/p>\n
said order was questioned by thepagppeiian-ts\u00bbnei,ein:b\u00abefore-\u00ab.. <\/p>\n
the Appeilate Authority\/District Chourt_-~a\u20acter2at)o’ut4’2’2f-yVe~ars<\/p>\n
by fiiing an application fof condonation   <\/p>\n
Appeilate Authority\/learned  regard
\nto the inordinate   appiication fiied
\nunder Section S’.Ovf the-i;.i–n1itat’i~ori_A’ct’i..andg,”c’onsequentiy the
\nappeai   _i.\u00a7ni:itatVio’i’i”i(Annexure-i~i to the
\nwrit  questioned in the writ
\npetition,  Sirag\ufb02lte Judge has rejected, both
\non thetoue:stion’~–otidei’a’$;:a’s’.weil as on merits. Hence, this<\/p>\n
wrii;’ap.peai.V writ petitioners.\n<\/p>\n
    Papi Reddy, iearned advocate appearing for<\/p>\n
“th’ei’appe–\u00a7.iar5it’contended that, regrant made in favour of<\/p>\n
respondhents 3 & 4 is totally iliegai and hence, ought to<\/p>\n
 xghave heen interfered with both by the Appellate Authority<\/p>\n
 Learned Singie Judge. The order of regrant being a<\/p>\n
t<\/p>\n
\/<\/p>\n
_,,..\n<\/p>\n
nuility, could be the subject matter of challenge even after
\na lapse of certain time and in view of the decision of this
\ncourt in the case of YAMUNAPPA VS. DEPUTY<\/p>\n
COMMISSIONER (20o1(4) KCCR 2696), the <\/p>\n
moving the appeal was liable to be CONGOl’l\u20ac'(‘E;_:’..ti\\iEtl.C\u00a7’l__:'[l3\u00a7’._<\/p>\n
learned District Judge failed to applgy. It:’was:’_cb’nte’nVde:d he<\/p>\n
that, the learned Single Judge has \ufb01_ga~i2e5d\u00e9tQ_1’c’dhsider_Ati:e\u00e9<\/p>\n
patent illegality committed  the regraiitingj:ae’u.thQVrViVt\\.i3 <\/p>\n
that there is failure to conslder”-tihegmatteirlin accordance
\nwith law by the learned\u00ab-.a’ppe\u00e9l_latte and the learned<\/p>\n
Single Judge and hencVei~–in.t_e:rferencehis  for.<\/p>\n
 he ._Weha’ve’*peii=uese.d.the writ appeal record and<\/p>\n
c0risi_dered”~the  made by the learned counsel.<\/p>\n
  Th..e_\u00b0p0;i.nt for consid.e.ration is:<\/p>\n
  _  the facts and circumstances of the
\nit  tiaex \/earned Single Judge is justified in<\/p>\n
 rejectieng the writ petition?”\n<\/p>\n
A. 4′ Ihdisputedly, Nagappa and Gurappa, the<\/p>\n
  “‘.pr7edecessors of the appellants executed the sale deed in<\/p>\n
(3<\/p>\n
favour of one Nagaraiaiah on 21.12.1965 conveying the
\naforesaid property. Even if the property is regranted to
\nthe appeliants, there being feeding of grant, the ratio of<\/p>\n
decision in the case of Lakshman Gowda (supra) appiies<\/p>\n
and wouid oniy enure to the benefit of <\/p>\n
Nagarajaiah. Shankarappa, husband of  <\/p>\n
and father of respondent No.4.’,””h’ad\u00abaV5’ri’.<\/p>\n
agreement to purchase the said property frorn;i$1a.gar’ai’a’i~aVh’~_<\/p>\n
on 22.06.1978. The reg’i*a.nt, order'”isi[AaVri.\u00e9’${n’r\u00e9~p),”<\/p>\n
questioned by thei”a.ppeiiran’tsf;before the ‘fnppeiiate<\/p>\n
Authority\/District JudgeiVs.i.onejp’a:ssed”–o_n_’i2.07. 1984. The<\/p>\n
appeai.__was–  i.e., nearly with a deiay of
\n22 yearsgin theaffidai}’i’t,,fi’ied in support of condonation of<\/p>\n
deiay’ ‘(A,nne$<uir.e_fF),  was stated, that they came to know<\/p>\n
ofthe  order on 15.04.2006, applied for a certified<\/p>\n
copyo'n."'*'_1,,5V8.i0V'5*."2006, obtained the same on 22.05.2006<\/p>\n
and— fii.ed-the appeai and as such, from the date of<\/p>\n
 i.<nowie'dge, the appeal filed is in time and there is no<\/p>\n
""n'egiigence or iatches on their part in fiiing the appeai.<\/p>\n
"iv-Lfearned District Judge white considering the said<\/p>\n
i<\/p>\n
\/.\n<\/p>\n
application noticed that, the mutation was effected in the<\/p>\n
name of grantee Shankarappa in the year 1984-_.8i..5_fi..ts’eEf,<\/p>\n
which had remained in challenge. It was  l.<\/p>\n
the appeilants have not substantiate,d__thei_r”poss’ess’i’on,an.d ”<\/p>\n
enjoyment of the property and their  <\/p>\n
in the RTC or in the revenue”—recoro’s.’ The’,:na.r’rn–ie,,,ot’ the,”<\/p>\n
respondents apllear   and
\nthat the Sale deed  in favour of
\nNagarajappa being  is a
\nconstructive.n,,otir\u00a7e,’._\u00bb_   the evidence on
\n held that, sufficient
\ngroundvywasAno’t’.m_a’de> condone the delay of 22 years
\nand consejlquenti-y the application filed under<\/p>\n
Section ,5 of theytlmitation Act for condonation of defay.<\/p>\n
  appv\u00e9ication for barred by limitation, the appeal<\/p>\n
l”‘.=.3_lS?)__V.st’o4o’d,V_yreiiected with the dismissal of the application<\/p>\n
se\u00e9’i<i ng._"co-ndonation of delay.\n<\/p>\n
 Learned Singie }udge though has held that,<\/p>\n
l  Section 5 of the Limitation Act is required to be considered<\/p>\n
t<\/p>\n
\/’<\/p>\n
r\u00bb<\/p>\n
8<\/span>
\niiberaiiy, however noticing the facts and circumstances of
\nthe case, having aiso regard the decision in the case of
\nSYED BHASHEER AHAMED & OTHERS VS. STATE OF
\nKARNATAK\/-i (ILR1994 KAR 159), has heid that, the writ<\/p>\n
petition is untenable in view of the inordinate_;cIe’i-aty-gin<\/p>\n
approaching the Appeifate Authority\/District  <\/p>\n
the matter is also devoid of merits;…… <\/p>\n
6. It is not in dispute that..,A:Nagappa_;<\/p>\n
the predecessors of appe|iant’s,so\u00bbld the’ pV_roipfe1rtyv;’inmfavoiir<\/p>\n
of Nagarajaiah LJE’10\ufb01’\u20ac’i’..” reg’i’ste:?:\u00a2\ufb02’Vg”i’-._sa|etvvtcleed dated<\/p>\n
21.12:196SQ’:i;The:r\u00a7eaft’ea1:’the\u00abp”ro’p”erty was mutated in the
\nnamevxof”Nagaraj.a’i4ah’.v._:fi’r:a,e,.possession and enjoyment of<\/p>\n
Nagar_a3’aia”h. “refiected”~~-‘ffrom the RTC is apparent.<\/p>\n
Na’:g’:ara,itaiai_h eintter-ed” into an agreement of saie with
\n 22.06.1978. Shani<arappa's narne<\/p>\n
.aro_peare\u00e9ci"Vii:n_t}he RTC in Column No.12(2). The ciaim of the<\/p>\n
 appei~!ari;ts that they are in possession of the property and<\/p>\n
A  igheiif. possession was sought to be disturbed on 15.04.1996<\/p>\n
is not substantiated by production of any evidence before<\/p>\n
i<\/p>\n
\/I<\/p>\n
9)<\/p>\n
the Appeilate Court. Though the regrant order was passed<\/p>\n
on 12.07.1984, the appeai was filed oniy on 30.031.33.95<\/p>\n
i.e., after a delay of about 22 years. The  _<\/p>\n
seeking condonation of delay has  <\/p>\n
considered by the Appellant Atutho-rity\/ieahrnledit'{}is.trict.’<\/p>\n
Judge with reference to thevfnateriallir,circumstah’::es off tlhegix<\/p>\n
case. It is after ob}’ect’ive consVi_d’e_ratigon of alitheivffacts and
\ncircumstances of the   H\ufb01udge has
\nrecorded the finding tihatihtherle i’io…’}Vu:VsitifViabEe ground to
\naccept  g   inordinate delay
\nof 22  competent authority
\nbeingiia findinlgyg.9};\u00bbfact.,’fu__nies’s”perverse of illegal, is not
\nEiable to be iinteirfered It was not shown before the<\/p>\n
learnedsygsingieyyJudge’or before us as to how the finding<\/p>\n
  hy.y_the Avplpeliate Authority\/learned District Judge<\/p>\n
 06.11.2006 with regard to limitation<\/p>\n
su”if_ers__v’frorn any rnateriai error or iilegallty. Since the<\/p>\n
 .sappeai~..–:is hopelessly barred by time and there is no<\/p>\n
“r.Ve><p.lianation of whatsoever nature to condone the<\/p>\n
 = .-.inordinate deiay of 22 years in seeking the reiief, the<\/p>\n
k<\/p>\n
\/<\/p>\n
a<\/p>\n
appeal was rightly rejected by the learned District Judge<\/p>\n
on the ground of unexpiained and inordinateW'de'Eay.<\/p>\n
Learned Single Judge having examined the <\/p>\n
found no ground to interfere. ijiaving  <\/p>\n
record, we do not find any groundgto  <\/p>\n
in the matter. Hence, the apoea} sta"r:.ds' reje:t'ed..V:,_…  it<\/p>\n
ri3\/ –<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Smt.Muniyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 6 January, 2010 Author: Manjula Chellur Gowda IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 6″” DAY OF JANUARY, 2010;}: PRESENT ‘uu THE HONBLE MRSJUSTICE MAN3L;LA.Vc}%:’ELL\u00e9j1’R & _ , _ THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE A.:\\:{vE:’\\’;:LJ’L3T%O’r\u00e9_A-:;AA[\u00a7;’OjxA{LO’A__ ‘] WRIT APPEAL NOf2683\/42069 (T<vO,A)f " " BETWEEN: […]<\/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-73074","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSmt.Muniyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 6 January, 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\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Smt.Muniyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 6 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-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=\"2010-01-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-07-01T16:29:04+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\\\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Smt.Muniyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 6 January, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-07-01T16:29:04+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1382,\"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\\\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010\",\"name\":\"Smt.Muniyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 6 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-07-01T16:29:04+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Smt.Muniyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 6 January, 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":"Smt.Muniyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 6 January, 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\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Smt.Muniyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 6 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-01-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-07-01T16:29:04+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\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Smt.Muniyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 6 January, 2010","datePublished":"2010-01-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-07-01T16:29:04+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010"},"wordCount":1382,"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\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010","name":"Smt.Muniyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 6 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-01-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-07-01T16:29:04+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-muniyamma-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-6-january-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Smt.Muniyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 6 January, 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\/73074","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=73074"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73074\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=73074"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=73074"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=73074"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}