{"id":77965,"date":"2008-07-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-06-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008"},"modified":"2015-05-16T12:50:12","modified_gmt":"2015-05-16T07:20:12","slug":"anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008","title":{"rendered":"Anthoniyamma vs The Managing Director on 1 July, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Anthoniyamma vs The Managing Director on 1 July, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nMFA.No. 134 of 2003(C)\n\n\n1. ANTHONIYAMMA, W\/O.RAJAPPAN J.,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. RAJU T.R., S\/O.RAJAPPAN,  DO.  DO.\n3. JAYARANI, D\/O.RAJAPPAN,  DO.  DO.\n4. JAYAKUMAR, S\/O.RAJAPPAN, DO.  DO.\n5. PUSHPARANI, D\/O.RAJAPPAN,  DO.   DO.\n6. THOMAS, S\/O.RAJAPPAN,  DO.   DO.\n7. VIJAYAKUMAR,  DO.    DO.\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. M.J.THOMAS, S\/O.DEVASIA JOSEPH,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.C.HARIDAS\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN\n\n Dated :01\/07\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n               J.B. KOSHY & P.N. RAVINDRAN, JJ.\n          ----------------------------------------------------\n                       M.F.A.NO.134 OF 2003\n           ----------------------------------------------------\n               Dated this the 1st day of July, 2008.\n\n                              JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
Koshy, J:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      A 7 year old child died in a motor accident. Father and<\/p>\n
mother of    the   child   approached     the   Motor Accidents Claims<\/p>\n
Tribunal, Pala for compensation. Even though Tribunal found that<\/p>\n
the accident occurred due      to  the    negligent driving    of the 2nd<\/p>\n
respondent, driver of the vehicle owned by the 1st respondent,<\/p>\n
against a claim of Rs.3,20,000\/= only an amount of Rs.74,600=<\/p>\n
was    allowed.      The dispute is     regarding     the    quantum of<\/p>\n
compensation.    It is contended that the child      was a student. If<\/p>\n
compensation was      awarded     under Section 163 A even without<\/p>\n
proving the negligence of the driver, the claimant will be entitled to a<\/p>\n
compensation of Rupees Two lakhs . Based upon the Division Bench<\/p>\n
decision of this court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Muneer<\/a><\/p>\n
(2003 (1) KLT 137) it was argued that quantum of compensation<\/p>\n
awarded under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (in short `the<\/p>\n
M.V.Act’) can never be lesser than the amount calculated as per the<\/p>\n
structured formula under section 163-A of M.V.Act because in claims<\/p>\n
MFA.No.134\/03                                                        .\n<\/p>\n
                                  2<\/span><\/p>\n
under section 163-A, negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle<\/p>\n
need not be proved. Therefore, it was argued that compensation that<\/p>\n
should be awarded when negligence proved should be higher.         We<\/p>\n
can award compensation only on the basis of settled legal principles<\/p>\n
of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the formula fixed under section<\/p>\n
163-A of the M.V.Act can be taken only as a guideline while assessing<\/p>\n
compensation under section 166.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            2.   Claims under sections 166 and 163-A are totally<\/p>\n
independent. Under section 163-A, if age and income at the time of<\/p>\n
the accident is determined, the compensation is fixed in the case of<\/p>\n
fatal accidents as mentioned in the second schedule. If there is only<\/p>\n
permanent disability, taking the multiplier fixed for the age group,<\/p>\n
income of the deceased and percentage of permanent disability,<\/p>\n
compensation can be calculated taking second schedule as a ready<\/p>\n
reckoner.   In case of non-earning persons Rs.15,000\/= is fixed as<\/p>\n
notional income.    (See Deepal Girishbhai Soni and others v.<\/p>\n
United India Insurance Co. Ltd.<\/a> (2004 ACJ 934). But, when claims<\/p>\n
are filed under section 166, entire matter including effect in further<\/p>\n
prospects etc. have to be considered by the Tribunal for granting<\/p>\n
MFA.No.134\/03                                                       .\n<\/p>\n
                                   3<\/span><\/p>\n
compensation.    It was further argued that in Lata Wadhwa and<\/p>\n
others v. State of Bihar and others<\/a> ((2001) 8 SCC 197), the<\/p>\n
Hon’ble Supreme Court has awarded Rs.1.50,000\/= as compensation<\/p>\n
apart from the general damages of Rs.50,000\/= for children aged<\/p>\n
between 5 and 10 years. For children aged between 10 to 15 years,<\/p>\n
compensation has to be calculated taking annual contribution as<\/p>\n
Rs.24,000\/= and a multiplier of 15, apart from the general damages of<\/p>\n
Rs.50,000\/=. The counsel also referred to the decision of the Hon’ble<\/p>\n
Supreme Court in M.S.Grewal and another v. Deep Chand Sood<\/p>\n
and others ((2001) 8 SCC 151) wherein it was held that multiplier<\/p>\n
method as adopted in motor accident claims cases can be applied in<\/p>\n
similar claims as was held in Lata Wadhwa’s case (supra) and<\/p>\n
Rs.5,00,000\/= awarded to the parents of deceased school student was<\/p>\n
not interfered by the Supreme Court.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            3. It is settled law that 2nd schedule can be taken for<\/p>\n
guidance for awarding compensation.         A three member bench of<\/p>\n
the Supreme Court in Smt.Supe Dei and others v. M\/s.National<\/p>\n
Insurance Company Ltd. and<\/a> another (JT 2002 (Suppl.1) SC 451),<\/p>\n
held that though the second schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act is<\/p>\n
MFA.No.134\/03                                                         .\n<\/p>\n
                                  4<\/span><\/p>\n
framed for the purpose of awarding compensation under Section 163-<\/p>\n
A, it serves as a guideline for determination of compensation under<\/p>\n
section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act also. In Abati Bezbaruah v.<\/p>\n
Dy.Director General, Geological Survey of India and<\/a> another<\/p>\n
((2003) 3 SCC 148), it was held that structured formula mentioned in<\/p>\n
the second schedule gives guidelines for determination of the amount<\/p>\n
of compensation in terms of section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act also.<\/p>\n
In A.P.S.R.T.C. v. M.Pentaiah Chary<\/a> ((2007) AIR SCW 5689), the<\/p>\n
Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that except in exceptional<\/p>\n
circumstances, second schedule should be followed in awarding<\/p>\n
compensation.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
           4. The incident occurred on 22.6.1995.     Under the 2nd<\/p>\n
schedule,  notional income of    a non earning   person is    fixed as<\/p>\n
Rs.15,000\/= per year and after deducting one third , Rs.10,000\/=<\/p>\n
can be taken for calculation of compensation.          In this    fatal<\/p>\n
accident case, the motor accident victim is an infant.    Father was<\/p>\n
aged 50 years at the time of the accident and mother was aged<\/p>\n
45 years. If age of the motor accident victim is considered, 15 is<\/p>\n
the apt multiplier as per the second schedule. But,    since mother<\/p>\n
MFA.No.134\/03                                                            .\n<\/p>\n
                                    5<\/span><\/p>\n
was aged 45 years, 13 is the apt multiplier. When an unmarried<\/p>\n
person dies, age of the claimants has to be looked into in a petition<\/p>\n
filed under section 166. Death of a child cannot be compensated in<\/p>\n
pecuniary terms. Even if the child is mentally or physically impaired, it<\/p>\n
will cause deep grief in the parents.    It is all the more same when a<\/p>\n
brilliant child goes to the school and parents have to find the body of<\/p>\n
the child in a damaged condition due to an accident not due to the<\/p>\n
fault of the child or parents. Its physical and mental impact cannot be<\/p>\n
described in words. Even though loss of care to the child cannot be<\/p>\n
measured in terms of money to award compensation, some yardstick<\/p>\n
should be followed.     It is needless to say that even compensation<\/p>\n
cannot be calculated on the formula adopted by Legislature while<\/p>\n
awarding compensation. It is contended that            immediately after<\/p>\n
passing of the award, father died due to the shock of the death<\/p>\n
of his child.   We are not considering that         aspect in this appeal.<\/p>\n
We are of the opinion that tribunal           ought to have granted<\/p>\n
compensation at least fixing 13 as the apt multiplier and thus the<\/p>\n
compensation payable will be Rs.1,30,000\/=.           The Tribunal    has<\/p>\n
awarded only Rs.50,000\/=. So additional compensation payable for<\/p>\n
the death of the child will be Rs.80,000\/=. With regard to the loss<\/p>\n
MFA.No.134\/03                                                         .\n<\/p>\n
                                    6<\/span><\/p>\n
of estate, pain and sufferings, it is contended that, for pain and<\/p>\n
sufferings only Rs.1,000\/=     was    awarded.      Death was instant.<\/p>\n
Considering the total compensation payable, we are not enhancing<\/p>\n
the   same.    The   additional    amount of Rs.80,000\/=     should be<\/p>\n
deposited by the 1st respondent owner of the bus with 7.5%<\/p>\n
interest from the date of application till the date of deposit over and<\/p>\n
above the decreed amount by the Tribunal. On deposit of the above<\/p>\n
amount, the 1st appellant\/mother is allowed to withdraw the same.<\/p>\n
            The appeal is partly allowed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                                  J.B. KOSHY
\n                                                      JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
                                              P.N. RAVINDRAN
\n                                                      JUDGE.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n\n  Cl\/tks\n\nMFA.No.134\/03         .\n                 7<\/span>\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Anthoniyamma vs The Managing Director on 1 July, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM MFA.No. 134 of 2003(C) 1. ANTHONIYAMMA, W\/O.RAJAPPAN J., … Petitioner 2. RAJU T.R., S\/O.RAJAPPAN, DO. DO. 3. JAYARANI, D\/O.RAJAPPAN, DO. DO. 4. JAYAKUMAR, S\/O.RAJAPPAN, DO. DO. 5. PUSHPARANI, D\/O.RAJAPPAN, DO. DO. 6. THOMAS, S\/O.RAJAPPAN, DO. […]<\/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-77965","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAnthoniyamma vs The Managing Director on 1 July, 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\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Anthoniyamma vs The Managing Director on 1 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-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=\"2008-06-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-05-16T07:20:12+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\\\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Anthoniyamma vs The Managing Director on 1 July, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-16T07:20:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1098,\"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\\\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008\",\"name\":\"Anthoniyamma vs The Managing Director on 1 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-16T07:20:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Anthoniyamma vs The Managing Director on 1 July, 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":"Anthoniyamma vs The Managing Director on 1 July, 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\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Anthoniyamma vs The Managing Director on 1 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-06-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-05-16T07:20:12+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\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Anthoniyamma vs The Managing Director on 1 July, 2008","datePublished":"2008-06-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-16T07:20:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008"},"wordCount":1098,"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\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008","name":"Anthoniyamma vs The Managing Director on 1 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-06-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-16T07:20:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anthoniyamma-vs-the-managing-director-on-1-july-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Anthoniyamma vs The Managing Director on 1 July, 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\/77965","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=77965"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77965\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=77965"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=77965"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=77965"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}