{"id":79892,"date":"2009-06-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-06-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009"},"modified":"2019-03-05T00:52:29","modified_gmt":"2019-03-04T19:22:29","slug":"k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009","title":{"rendered":"K.S.E.B vs P.Madhavan Nair on 10 June, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
K.S.E.B vs P.Madhavan Nair on 10 June, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nAS.No. 199 of 1997()\n\n\n\n1. K.S.E.B.\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. P.MADHAVAN NAIR\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.THOMAS ANTONY KALLANPALLY\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR\n\n Dated :10\/06\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                                                         \"CR\"\n                     V. RAMKUMAR, J.\n                 = = = = = = = = = = = = =\n                    A.S. No.199 of 1997\n                 = = = = = = = = = = = = = =\n            Dated this the 10th day of June, 2009\n\n                         JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
     Defendants 1 and 2 (namely Assistant Executive<\/p>\n
Engineer, Kerala State Electricity Board, Electrical Major<\/p>\n
Section, Koyilandi and the Kerala State Electricity Board,<\/p>\n
Thiruvananthapuram) in O.S.No.167 of 1994 on the file of the<\/p>\n
Subordinate Judges Court, Koyilandi are the appellants in this<\/p>\n
appeal. The said suit, instituted by the respondent herein,<\/p>\n
was one for a declaration that Ext.A6 demand notice dated<\/p>\n
25.8.1994 is null and void and not legally enforcible and for a<\/p>\n
perpetual  injunction   restraining   the   defendants    from<\/p>\n
enforcing payment under the said demand notice.<\/p>\n
     2. The fact that the plaintiff installed a 1 HP electric<\/p>\n
motor with pump set in his house was admitted. The main<\/p>\n
contention raised by the plaintiff was that by installing the<\/p>\n
pump set he was not committing breach of any of the<\/p>\n
provisions of law or the Regulations issued by the Kerala<\/p>\n
A.S.No.199 of 1997
\n                               2<\/span><\/p>\n
Electricity Board (KSEB for short). The KSEB on the other<\/p>\n
hand contended that by installing the pump set, the plaintiff<\/p>\n
was increasing the sanctioned connected load of 400 watts<\/p>\n
thereby attracting the penalty under Clause 42(d) of the<\/p>\n
Regulations Relating to Conditions of Supply of Electrical<\/p>\n
Energy (” Regulations” for short) issued by the KSEB in<\/p>\n
exercise of the powers conferred on it by Section 79(j) of the<\/p>\n
Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948.\n<\/p>\n
     3. The learned Subordinate Judge was of the view that<\/p>\n
since the pump set installed by the plaintiff, although without<\/p>\n
permission, was used for domestic purpose only, Clause 42(d)<\/p>\n
of the Regulations was not attracted.        According to the<\/p>\n
learned Subordinate Judge, the said provision would be<\/p>\n
attracted only if the consumer exceeded the contracted load<\/p>\n
for a      purpose different from the specific purpose<\/p>\n
contemplated under the contract for that tarif. Accordingly,<\/p>\n
the suit was decreed granting the declaration as well as<\/p>\n
injunction prayed for. Hence this appeal.<\/p>\n
     4. After hearing both sides, I do not think that the view<\/p>\n
A.S.No.199 of 1997
\n                               3<\/span><\/p>\n
taken by the court below is sustainable. The specific case of<\/p>\n
the defendants is that by installing the 1 HP pump-set<\/p>\n
without the permission of the KSEB and without notice under<\/p>\n
Clause 24 of the Regulations,       the installation itself was<\/p>\n
unauthorised. According to the KSEB, the authorised load for<\/p>\n
the plaintiff’s premises was only 400 watts.<\/p>\n
     5. If Clause 42(d) of the Regulations is attracted, then<\/p>\n
there is no dispute that the plaintiff will be treated as having<\/p>\n
committed misuse of energy and liable to be billed at three<\/p>\n
times the rate applicable to the respective tariff for the<\/p>\n
previous six months from the date of detection of the misuse<\/p>\n
as provided under Clause 42(d) of the               Regulations.<\/p>\n
Admittedly, the KSEB has billed the plaintiff at the above<\/p>\n
rate for a period of two years which is not sanctioned by the<\/p>\n
said Clause 42(d).\n<\/p>\n
     6. Ext.B12 is a true copy of the relevant page of the<\/p>\n
Consumer’s Personal Deposit Register pertaining to the<\/p>\n
plaintiff .  It shows that a single phase connection to the<\/p>\n
plaintiff’s house was given on 21.5.1977 with Consumer<\/p>\n
A.S.No.199 of 1997
\n                               4<\/span><\/p>\n
No.902 under Tariff I(a). It also shows that connected load<\/p>\n
was 400 watts. The said load of 400 watts was fixed after<\/p>\n
taking into account 6 light points and 2 plug points only.<\/p>\n
Clause 24 of the Regulations reads as follows:-<\/p>\n
          ” Should the consumer, at any time after the<\/p>\n
     supply of energy has been commenced, desire to<\/p>\n
     increase the number of wattage or capacity of<\/p>\n
     lights, fans or motors etc., on his premises on a<\/p>\n
     temporary or permanent basis or in any way alter<\/p>\n
     the position of his wiring therein, notice thereof<\/p>\n
     must be sent by the consumer in writing to the<\/p>\n
     Board whose representative will call and inspect<\/p>\n
     the alteration and, if necessary change meters and<\/p>\n
     fuses and alter the service line. For this purpose if<\/p>\n
     a single phase service line is to be converted to<\/p>\n
     three phase or change of size of conductor to meet<\/p>\n
     increased maximum demand is necessitated, the<\/p>\n
     work shall be done at the cost of consumer on<\/p>\n
     deposit work basis.     A test report signed by a<\/p>\n
     licensed wiring contractor should also be produced<\/p>\n
     by the consumer along with his application for<\/p>\n
     extension and alteration.     The consumer should<\/p>\n
     remit the testing fee. Failure to give such notice<\/p>\n
A.S.No.199 of 1997
\n                              5<\/span><\/p>\n
    may derange the supply system and will render the<\/p>\n
    supply liable to be summarily discontinued.<\/p>\n
    During such time as alterations, additions or<\/p>\n
    repairs are being executed, the supply to the<\/p>\n
    circuit, which is being altered, added to        or<\/p>\n
    repaired, must be entirely disconnected and it<\/p>\n
    shall remain disconnected until the alterations,<\/p>\n
    additions or repairs have been tested and passed<\/p>\n
    by the Board. In the event of any unauthorised<\/p>\n
    extensions, alterations or repairs resulting in any<\/p>\n
    damage to the system of the Board, the consumer<\/p>\n
    will have to pay the Board all expenses on account<\/p>\n
    of such damages also.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         Note:-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
        i.   Supply taken from the existing plug<\/p>\n
           point\/mains to connect up any appliance<\/p>\n
           installed within the same premises, shall be<\/p>\n
           treated as   additional load irrespective of<\/p>\n
           length of the connecting lead, if the<\/p>\n
           appliances   installed  are   for   bonafide<\/p>\n
           purpose.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
        ii.    Supply taken from an existing plug<\/p>\n
           point\/mains   to   any  appliance   situated<\/p>\n
           outside the premises will be treated as an<\/p>\n
           extension. Such extension should be taken<\/p>\n
A.S.No.199 of 1997
\n                                  6<\/span><\/p>\n
             only for temporary purposes.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          iii. Supply taken from an existing plug point<\/p>\n
             for temporary film shows in Government<\/p>\n
             recognised Educational        Institutions    is<\/p>\n
             exempted from payment of testing fee, even<\/p>\n
             if it will be an extension vide Note (i) and (ii)<\/p>\n
             above. However, prior intimation should be<\/p>\n
             given to the local K.S.E.Board office about<\/p>\n
             this extension.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          iv. If the installation remains disconnected for<\/p>\n
             a period exceeding one year the same shall<\/p>\n
             be reconnected to the distribution mains<\/p>\n
             only after conducting the tests prescribed<\/p>\n
             above.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     7. Thus, if the consumer at any time after supply of<\/p>\n
energy has been commenced desires to increase the load on<\/p>\n
his premises either on a temporary basis or on a permanent<\/p>\n
basis, he has to give a notice in writing to the KSEB. As<\/p>\n
already noticed, at the time of giving connection to the<\/p>\n
plaintiff and fixing the connected load at 400 watts, 6 light<\/p>\n
points & 2 plug points alone were sanctioned. If so, before<\/p>\n
installing a 1 HP motor and pump-set, the plaintiff was bound<\/p>\n
A.S.No.199 of 1997
\n                               7<\/span><\/p>\n
to give notice under Clause 24 of the Regulations. Sub Clause<\/p>\n
(d) of Clause 42 of the Regulations reads as follows:-<\/p>\n
           “If the consumer exceeds the contracted load<\/p>\n
     without prior permission of the Board or energy<\/p>\n
     supplied for a specific purpose under a particular<\/p>\n
     tariff is used without the Board’s knowledge and<\/p>\n
     approval for a different purpose not contemplated<\/p>\n
     in the contract for supply and for which higher<\/p>\n
     tariff is applicable coming under misuse of energy<\/p>\n
     within the meaning of the I.E.Act 1910. Misuse of<\/p>\n
     energy will be billed at three times the rate<\/p>\n
     applicable to the respective tariff for the previous<\/p>\n
     six months from the date of detection of misuse<\/p>\n
     unless there are convincing reasons for adopting<\/p>\n
     different periods and supply disconnected without<\/p>\n
     notice. The imposition of this higher rate will not<\/p>\n
     relieve the consumer from any penalties imposed<\/p>\n
     by law.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      8.  This was a case in which the above clause was<\/p>\n
squarely attracted since the plaintiff, who is the consumer,<\/p>\n
had exceeded the        contracted load without       obtaining<\/p>\n
permission of the Board under Clause 24.           He thereby<\/p>\n
A.S.No.199 of 1997
\n                                8<\/span><\/p>\n
became liable to be billed at three times the rate applicable to<\/p>\n
the respective tariff for the previous six months from the date<\/p>\n
of detection. Merely because the factum of installation of the<\/p>\n
pump-set came to the notice of the Board from the plaintiff<\/p>\n
himself, the same does not absolve the plaintiff from his<\/p>\n
liability to pay the penalty as provided under Clause 42(d) of<\/p>\n
the Regulations. The argument advanced on the side of the<\/p>\n
plaintiff that as long as he uses the pump-set only for<\/p>\n
domestic purposes and consumes electricity within Slab III<\/p>\n
(upto 30 units per month) which was allotted to him cannot<\/p>\n
be sustained. The slab III in which the plaintiff was put all<\/p>\n
these years was changed to Slab VIII (upto 100 units per<\/p>\n
month) in the year 1994 consequent on noting the increased<\/p>\n
consumption of power beyond Slab III after the unauthorised<\/p>\n
installation of the motor and pump set.\n<\/p>\n
      9. The judgment and decree passed by the court below<\/p>\n
overlooking the above vital aspects of the matter, are set<\/p>\n
aside and the suit will stand dismissed. It is, however, made<\/p>\n
clear that since under Ext.A6 invoice the defendants have<\/p>\n
A.S.No.199 of 1997
\n                                  9<\/span><\/p>\n
billed the plaintiff for a period of 2 years as against the<\/p>\n
maximum period of six months permissible under Clause 42<\/p>\n
(d) above, the said bill cannot be enforced without rectifying<\/p>\n
the mistake thereunder.         Hence, the defendants will be<\/p>\n
entitled to enforce payment against the plaintiff only after<\/p>\n
issuing a revised bill in terms of Clause 42(d) of the<\/p>\n
Regulations calculating the dues for a period of six months<\/p>\n
only.  It goes without saying that the defendants will be<\/p>\n
entitled to charge interest on the amounts in the revised bill<\/p>\n
to be issued hereinafter at the rates specified    under sub-<\/p>\n
clause (e) of Clause 32 of the Regulations, but only from the<\/p>\n
date of the revised bill till realisation.<\/p>\n
     In the result this appeal is allowed to the limited extent<\/p>\n
as indicated above. No costs.\n<\/p>\n
Dated this the 10thday of June, 2009.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                  V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE<\/p>\n
sj<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court K.S.E.B vs P.Madhavan Nair on 10 June, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM AS.No. 199 of 1997() 1. K.S.E.B. … Petitioner Vs 1. P.MADHAVAN NAIR … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN For Respondent :SRI.THOMAS ANTONY KALLANPALLY The Hon’ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR Dated :10\/06\/2009 O R D E R “CR” V. […]<\/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-79892","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nK.S.E.B vs P.Madhavan Nair on 10 June, 2009 - 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\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"K.S.E.B vs P.Madhavan Nair on 10 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-04T19:22:29+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\\\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"K.S.E.B vs P.Madhavan Nair on 10 June, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-04T19:22:29+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1580,\"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\\\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009\",\"name\":\"K.S.E.B vs P.Madhavan Nair on 10 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-04T19:22:29+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"K.S.E.B vs P.Madhavan Nair on 10 June, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"K.S.E.B vs P.Madhavan Nair on 10 June, 2009 - 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\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"K.S.E.B vs P.Madhavan Nair on 10 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-04T19:22:29+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\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"K.S.E.B vs P.Madhavan Nair on 10 June, 2009","datePublished":"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-04T19:22:29+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009"},"wordCount":1580,"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\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009","name":"K.S.E.B vs P.Madhavan Nair on 10 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-04T19:22:29+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-s-e-b-vs-p-madhavan-nair-on-10-june-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"K.S.E.B vs P.Madhavan Nair on 10 June, 2009"}]},{"@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\/79892","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=79892"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/79892\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=79892"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=79892"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=79892"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}