{"id":78885,"date":"2008-11-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008"},"modified":"2017-06-18T06:17:42","modified_gmt":"2017-06-18T00:47:42","slug":"nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"Nazir Mohamed … Deft\/Respt\/ vs Jambarlal Jain (Died) on 6 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
Nazir Mohamed … Deft\/Respt\/ vs Jambarlal Jain (Died) on 6 November, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 06\/11\/2008\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.C.ARUMUGAPERUMAL ADITYAN\n\nS.A.(MD)No.64 of 2000\n&\nS.A.(MD)No.558 of 2000\n\nNazir Mohamed\t\t\t\t... Deft\/Respt\/Appellant\n\t\t\t\t\t    (Appellant in S.A.64\/2000)\n\t\t\t\t\t    and (Respondent in<\/pre>\n
\t\t\t\t\t    S.A.558 of 2000)
\nVs.<\/p>\n
\n\n1.Jambarlal Jain (died)\n2.J.Kamala\n3.S.J.Madanraj Jain\n4.M.Vimala \t\t\t\t... Pltfs.\/Appellants\/Respts\n\t\t\t\t\t    (Respondents in\n\t\t\t\t\t    S.A.64 of 2000)\n\t\t\t\t\t    and (Appellants in\n\t\t\t\t\t    S.A.558 of 2000)\n\n(R2 to R4 are brought on\n record as LRs of the deceased\n sole respondent vide order\n of Court dt.13.10.2008 made\n in M.P(MD).No.1 of 2008.)\n\nPRAYER IN S.A.64\/2000\n\nSecond Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code\n<\/pre>\n
of Civil Procedure, against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge,
\nKumbakonam in A.S.No.16 of 1998 dated 17.09.1999 reversing the judgment and
\ndecree of the District Munsif, Valangaiman at Kumbakonam in O.S.No.169 of 1994
\ndated 22.01.1998 praying that the same may be set aside and that of the judgment
\nof the trial Court be restored.\n<\/p>\n
PRAYER IN S.A.558\/2000<\/p>\n
Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code
\nof Civil Procedure, against the judgment and decree dated 17.09.1999 passed in
\nA.S.No.16 of 1998 n the file of the learned Subordinate Judge of Kumbakonam
\npartly reversing the Judgment and Decree dated 22.01.1998 passed in O.S.No.169
\nof 1994 on the file fo the learned District Munsif of Valangaiman at Kumbakonam.\n<\/p>\n
!For Appellant\t… Mr.T.Srinivasa Rahavan, Advocate
\n(in S.A.64\/2000
\nand Respondent
\nin S.A.No.\n<\/p>\n
568\/2000)<\/p>\n
^For Respondents… M\/s.Sarvabhauman Associates
\n(in S.A.64\/2000
\nand Appellant
\nin S.A.No.\n<\/p>\n
568\/2000)<\/p>\n
:COMMON JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
\t\tBoth the appeals have been directed against the decree and judgment
\nin O.S.No.169 of 1994 on the file of the Court of District Munsif, Valangaiman
\nat Kumbakonam. As against the dismissal of the suit in respect of the delivery
\nof possession in respect of half share of the plaint schedule property, the
\nplaintiff has preferred  S.A.No.558\/2000. In respect of a decree for one half
\nshare of the plaint schedule property the defendant has preferred the Second
\nAppeal in S.A.No.64\/2000.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t2.The averments in the plaint in brief sans irrelevant particulars
\nare as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
\t\tThe plaintiff is the owner of the house and the site bearing Door
\nNo.4 in R.S.No.120\/13 at Mela Senia Street, Aduthurai, which is the plaint
\nschedule property. The plaintiff’s father had purchased the plaint schedule
\nproperty under a registered sale deed dated 07.09.1940.  The property was
\noriginally let out to the defendant’s father Thiru. M.Abudul Aziz for a monthly
\nrent of Rs.25\/. After the death of the defendant’s father M.Abudul Aziz, the
\ndefendant has attorned the tenancty in favour of the plaintiff for the same
\nmonthly rent of Rs.25\/- and the defendant had agreed to pay the Panchayat Tax
\nfor the suit house.  The defendant committed default in payment of rent.  The
\narrears of rent come to the tune of Rs.1,225\/- upto February- 1994.  But the
\nplaintiff restricted his claim for three years i.e., Rs.900\/- only.  Now, the
\ndefendant is making all efforts to get patta in his name.  Hence, the defendant
\nis liable to be evicted for denial of the plaintiff’s title in respect of the
\nsuit property.  The plaintiff has also issued a  suit notice on 23.03.1994
\ndemanding the defendant to pay the arrears of rent and also to vacate and
\nhandover the delivery of possession of the property.  In spite of receipt of the
\nsaid notice, the defendant refused to handover the delivery of possession but,
\nhas sent a reply with false contention.  Hence, the suit for declaration and for
\npossession.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t3.The defendant in his written statement would contend that the
\nplaintiff is not the owner of the house and site bearing Door No.4, in
\nRS.No.120\/13, Mela Senia Street, Aduthurai.  This defendant is not a tenant
\nunder the plaintiff in respect of the plaint schedule property.  There was no
\nattornment of tenancy in favour of the plaintiff by this defendant.  This
\ndefendant is the absolute owner of the plaint schedule property, which was
\npurchased by the defendant’s father Abdul Aziz by a registered sale deed dated
\n17.02.1938 for a valuable consideration.  The defendant is in possession and
\nenjoyment of the plaint schedule property from the date of purchase of his
\nfather.  The defendant is not in possession of the plaint schedule property as a
\ntenant but as an absolute owner.  The defendant has not paid any rent to the
\nplaintiff or to his father.  The suit property was never assessed in the name of
\nthe plaintiff’s father but was assessed only in the name of the defendant’s
\nfather Abdul Aziz.  The defendant got this property from his father under a
\nregistered lease deed dated 24.03.1966. From that date onwards, this defendant
\nis in enjoyment of the suit property with absolute right.  The property tax has
\nnow been assessed in the name of this defendant.  No question of denial of title
\narises in this case.  The sale deed filed by the plaintiff should be in respect
\nof some other property and not for the suit property.  This defendant’s father’s
\nsale deed is prior to the plaintiff’s father’s alleged sale deed.  The plaintiff
\nhas not mentioned the date of commencement of tenancy and also the date of
\nattornment.  The defendant is not bound to deliver the possession of the suit
\nproperty and he has also not liable to pay any amount towards arrears of rent.
\nHence, the suit is liable to be dismissed with costs.  On the above pleadings,
\nthe learned trial judge had framed three issues for trial.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t4.The plaintiff has examined himself as P.W.1 and exhibited Exs.A1
\nto A6.  The defendant has examined  himself as D.W.1 besides examining one
\nMd.Ali, D.W.2.  On the side of the defendant, Exs.B1 to B.34 were marked.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t5.After meticulously going through the evidence both oral and
\ndocumentary, the learned trial Judge has come to a conclusion that there was no
\nlandlord tenant relationship between the parties, had dismissed the suit without
\ncosts. Aggrieved by the finding of the learned trial Judge, the plaintiff
\npreferred an appeal in A.S.No.16\/1998 before the Subordinate Judge, Kumbakonam.
\nThe learned first appellate Judge, after giving due deliberations to the
\nsubmissions made by the counsel on both sides and after scanning the evidence
\nboth oral and documentary placed before the learned trial Judge, had partly
\nallowed the appeal thereby declaring the plaintiff’s one half right in respect
\nof the plaint schedule property and dismissed the relief of recovery of
\npossession and also relegated the question of mesne profit to a separate
\nproceedings under Order 20, Rule 12 CPC with a direction that the plaintiff can
\nclaim mesne profits only in respect of three years prior to the date of filing
\nof the suit with costs. The Defendant has preferred S.A.No.64 of 2000 against
\nthe said decree and judgment of the learned first appellate Judge and the
\nplaintiff has preferred S.A.No.558 of 2000 in respect of dismissal of the suit
\nfor recovery of possession.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t6.The following substantial questions of law are involved in this
\nSecond Appeal:-\n<\/p>\n
\t\t“1.Whether the Lower Appellate Court is right in refusing the relief
\nof possession especially when the Lower Appellate Court granted a relief of
\nmesne profits till delivery of possession?\n<\/p>\n
\t\t2.Whether the Lower Appellate Court is right in holding that the
\nplaintiff is entitled to a declaration in respect of half of the suit property
\noverlooking the pleadings and the documents of title in the instant case.?”\n<\/p>\n
\t7.Substantial Question of Law No.2:-\n<\/p>\n
\t\tAccording to P.W.1, the plaint schedule property originally belonged
\nto one Rajagopala Pattar under a Court sale from whom his (P.W.1’s) father had
\npurchased the same under Ex.A1, sale deed.  Ex.A2 is the sale certificate, which
\nreveals that in an execution of a decree in S.C.No.753\/1931 half right in the
\nhouse situated in Natham S.No.120\/13, Mela Senia Street, Aduthurai, was sold in
\nthe Court auction in favour of Rajagopala Pattar, the auction purchaser, for a
\nco-operative loan taken by the defendant.  Ex.A3 is the delivery certificate for
\nEx.A2 sale certificate.  It is pertinent to note that the defendant’s father
\nviz.,   Abdul Aziz Sahib is an attestor to Ex.A3, Sale Certificate.  Ex.A1 is
\nthe sale deed in favour of the plaintiff’s father dated 07.09.1940 executed by
\nRajagopala Pattar, the decree holder\/Court auction purchaser of one half of the
\nplaint schedule property, under Exs.A2 and A3 to discharge a loan under a
\npromissory note, the said Rajagopala Pattar, had executed Ex.A1, Sale deed in
\nfavour of the plaintiff’s father Suklal Chouhar, after referring the court sale
\nin favour of him in E.P.341\/92 in S.C.No.753\/1931.  But the recitals to the
\nschedule of property sold under Ex.A1, the vendor had described the entire house
\nin Natham S.No.120\/13, Mela Senia Street, Aduthurai, instead of scheduling half
\nof the property he had purchased under the Court auction sale under Exs.A2 and
\nA3.  Only under such circumstances, the learned first appellate Judge has
\ncorrectly held that the plaintiff is entitled to a declaration of his title only
\nin respect of half of the plaint schedule property under Ex.A1 and not in
\nrespect of the entire property.  Per contra, it is the case of the claim of the
\ndefendant that his father had purchased the house and the site Door No.4 in
\nNatham S.No.120\/13 in Mela Seniar Street, Aduthurai, under  the sale deed dated
\n17.02.1932, which is Ex.B1.  Under Ex.B1, one Vasudeva Chettiar had executed the
\nsaid sale deed on his behalf and also on behalf of his minor son Gopalan in
\nfavour of the defendant’s father Sheik Abdul Aziz.  Under Ex.B1  the house in
\nRS.No.120\/13, Mela Senia Street, Aduthurai  with a measurement of 220 ft. east
\nwest, 16 ft north south was sold to the father of the defendant.  Under Ex.A6,
\nsale deed dated 05.06.1935 one Govindasamy Pillai had purchased the entire
\nplaint schedule property from Srinivasa Patta and Panchanatha Pattar, the
\njudgment debtors under Ex.A2.  From the said Govindasamy Pillai, the defendant’s
\nfather had purchased the property under the sale deed dated 13.09.1935.  Under
\nExs.A2 and A3, Panchanatha Asari had no title in respect of the entire plaint
\nschedule property to convey the same under Ex.A6 to Govindasamy Pillai, who is
\nthe vendor under Ex.B2, the sale deed, dated 13.09.1935 in favour of the father
\nof the defendant viz., Abdul Aziz Sahib, in respect of the entire tiled house in
\nNatham S.No.120\/13 measuring 26 ft north south 206 ft east west (5369 Sq.ft)
\n(Exs.A2 and A3, are of the year 1931).  The subsequent document Ex.A6, in favour
\nof Govindasami Pillai is in respect of the entire plaint schedule property by
\nPanchanatha Pattar and Srinivasa Pattar.  Under Ex.B2 executed by Govindasamy
\nPillai, the vendee under Ex.A6, to the father of the defendant viz., Abdul Aziz
\nSahib is entitled only in respect of one half of the property scheduled under
\nthose documents and not more than that.  Further, it is pertinent to note that
\nthe defendant’s father Abdul Aziz is an attestor to Ex.A3, delivery certificate,
\nin respect of one half of the plaint schedule property.  The defendant cannot
\nplead ignorance about Exs.A2 and A3, Court auction sale, in respect of one half
\nof the plaint schedule property.  After taking into consideration of the above
\naspects only, the learned first appellate judge has come to a correct conclusion
\nthat the plaintiff is entitled to half share in the plaint schedule property and
\nin consequence declared plaintiff’s right in respect of half of the plaint
\nschedule property, which does not require any interference from this Court.
\nHence, Substantial Question of Law No.2 is answered accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
\t8.Substantial Question of Law No.1:-\n<\/p>\n
\t\tAfter declaring one half right in respect of the plaint schedule
\nproperty, the learned first appellate Judge has refused the relief for recovery
\nof possession on the ground that the defendants have produced the documents to
\nshow that they are in possession and enjoyment of the property (Ex.B9 to B.32).
\nThere is no pleadings in the written statement filed by the defendant that he
\nhas prescribed title by way of adverse possession in respect of the entire
\nplaint schedule property.  The learned first appellate Judge at one place has
\nrejected the relief of delivery of recovery of possession in respect of the suit
\nproperty has granted mesne profit for three years prior to the institution of
\nthe suit. Both the above said findings are diametrically opposite to each other.
\nOnce the recovery of possession is denied, then there is no question of granting
\nany mesne profit arises.  After declaring one half right in the plaint schedule
\nproperty in favour of the plaintiff, the learned appellate Judge ought to have
\ngranted recovery of possession also in respect of one half share in the plaint
\nschedule property.  Both the courts below have concurrently held that there is
\nno landlord-tenancy relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant.  Under
\nsuch circumstances, there is no question of mesne profit arises in this case.
\nSo as far as the refusal of the relief of recovery of possession in respect of
\nthe half of the plaint schedule property by the learned first appellate Judge,
\nwarrants interference from this Court.  Substantial Question of Law No.1 is
\nanswered accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t9.In fine, the Second Appeal No.558 of 2000 is allowed and the
\ndecree and judgment of the learned first appellate Judge in A.S.No.16\/1998 on
\nthe file of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Kumbakonam is set aside in respect
\nof dismissal of the suit for recovery of possession in respect of half of the
\nplaint schedule property.  The plaintiff is entitled to recover half of the
\nplaint schedule property after identifying the same with the help of an Advocate
\nCommissioner at the time of execution of the decree. In other respects, the
\ndecree of the learned first appellate Judge in A.S.No.16\/1998 on the file of the
\nCourt of Subordinate Judge, Kumbakonam is hereby confirmed. Second Appeal No.64
\nof 2000 is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition
\nis closed.\tTime for delivery of half of the plaint schedule property is one
\nmonth after the identification of the same before the executing Court.\n<\/p>\n
Mpk<\/p>\n
To<\/p>\n
1.The Subordinate Judge,
\n  Kumbakonam.\n<\/p>\n
2.The District Munsif,
\n  Valangaiman at
\n  Kumbakonam.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court Nazir Mohamed … Deft\/Respt\/ vs Jambarlal Jain (Died) on 6 November, 2008 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06\/11\/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.C.ARUMUGAPERUMAL ADITYAN S.A.(MD)No.64 of 2000 & S.A.(MD)No.558 of 2000 Nazir Mohamed … Deft\/Respt\/Appellant (Appellant in S.A.64\/2000) and (Respondent in S.A.558 of 2000) Vs. 1.Jambarlal Jain (died) […]<\/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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-78885","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nNazir Mohamed ... Deft\/Respt\/ vs Jambarlal Jain (Died) on 6 November, 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\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Nazir Mohamed ... Deft\/Respt\/ vs Jambarlal Jain (Died) on 6 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-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=\"2008-11-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-06-18T00:47:42+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=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Nazir Mohamed … Deft\\\/Respt\\\/ vs Jambarlal Jain (Died) on 6 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-18T00:47:42+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":2324,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008\",\"name\":\"Nazir Mohamed ... Deft\\\/Respt\\\/ vs Jambarlal Jain (Died) on 6 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-18T00:47:42+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Nazir Mohamed … Deft\\\/Respt\\\/ vs Jambarlal Jain (Died) on 6 November, 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":"Nazir Mohamed ... Deft\/Respt\/ vs Jambarlal Jain (Died) on 6 November, 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\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Nazir Mohamed ... Deft\/Respt\/ vs Jambarlal Jain (Died) on 6 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-06-18T00:47:42+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Nazir Mohamed … Deft\/Respt\/ vs Jambarlal Jain (Died) on 6 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-18T00:47:42+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008"},"wordCount":2324,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008","name":"Nazir Mohamed ... Deft\/Respt\/ vs Jambarlal Jain (Died) on 6 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-18T00:47:42+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nazir-mohamed-deftrespt-vs-jambarlal-jain-died-on-6-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Nazir Mohamed … Deft\/Respt\/ vs Jambarlal Jain (Died) on 6 November, 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\/78885","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=78885"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78885\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=78885"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=78885"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=78885"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}