{"id":86701,"date":"2004-09-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-09-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004"},"modified":"2017-09-08T23:15:50","modified_gmt":"2017-09-08T17:45:50","slug":"p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004","title":{"rendered":"P.Meenakshiammal vs G.Muralidharan on 21 September, 2004"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">P.Meenakshiammal vs G.Muralidharan on 21 September, 2004<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED:21\/9\/2004\n\nCORAM\n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.KANAGARAJ.\n\nCIVIL REVISION PETITION (NPD)NOS.705 of 2004\n AND\n CRP NPD. 706 of 2004\nAND\nC.M.P.NOS.5605 AND 5606 OF 2004\n\nP.Meenakshiammal                               ...  Petitioner\n\n-Vs-\n\nG.Muralidharan                                 ...  Respondent<\/pre>\n<p>         Civil Revision Petitions filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu<br \/>\nBuildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 as stated therein.\n<\/p>\n<pre>!For Petitioner       .. Mr.Raghul Balaji\n\n^For Respondent       .. Mr.R.Loganathan\n\n:COMMON ORDER\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>                Both the  above  Civil  Revision  Petitions  have  been  filed<br \/>\nagainst  the  common judgment and decree dated 11.3.2003 respectively rendered<br \/>\nin R.C.A.Nos.329 and 335 of 2001 by the Rent Control Appellate Authority  (VII<br \/>\nSmall  Causes  Judge),  Chennai  thereby reversing the fair and decretal order<br \/>\ndated 18.4.2001 respectively made in C.M.P.No.60 of 1 999  and  M.P.No.800  of<br \/>\n2000  in  R.E.P.No.410  of  1998 in R.C.O.P.No.88 of 1998 by the Court of Rent<br \/>\nController(XVI Small Causes Judge), Chennai.\n<\/p>\n<p>                2.  Tracing the history of the above  Civil  Revisions  having<br \/>\ncome  to be filed, what comes to be known is that the petitioner herein is the<br \/>\nlandlady who filed R.C.O.P.No.88  of  1998  for  eviction  of  the  respondent<br \/>\ntherein for wilful default on the ground that originally one Mr.Kanniappan was<br \/>\nthe  tenant  of  the  tenanted premises and he was carrying on the business of<br \/>\nblacksmith; that on his death, his wife claiming to  be  associated  with  the<br \/>\nbusiness  of  her  husband  asserted  right  to  continue in occupation of the<br \/>\ntenanted premises and offered to pay rent; that the petitioner herein  refused<br \/>\nto  receive  the  rent  and to recognize her position as tenant upon which she<br \/>\nfiled R.C.O.P.No.982 of 1992 for deposit of rents; that the said R.C.O.P.  was<br \/>\nallowed by an order dated 15.3.1994 wherein the tenant was directed to deposit<br \/>\nthe rent into court directly; that the tenant  defaulted  in  the  payment  of<br \/>\nrents  for the months of July and August 1996 and filed M.P.No.648 of 1996 for<br \/>\ncondoning the delay in depositing the rent and offered to  deposit  the  rent;<br \/>\nthat the said miscellaneous petition was dismissed on 14.7.1997.\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.   It  further  comes to be known that since the tenant had wilfully<br \/>\ndefaulted in the payment of rent, the petitioner has  filed  R.C.O.P.No.88  of<br \/>\n1998  for  eviction  on the ground of willful default in payment of rent; that<br \/>\nnotices were sent to the tenant through court as well as the bailiff and  were<br \/>\nreturned as &#8220;Door locked&#8221;; that publication was effected in Makkal Kural; that<br \/>\nsince  the  respondent failed to appear even after paper publication, ex-parte<br \/>\norder was passed on 26.6.1998 in the  R.C.O.P.    directing  eviction  of  the<br \/>\ntenant,  further  directing  the tenant to hand over possession of the demised<br \/>\npremises within a period of three months; that after three months  of  passing<br \/>\nof  the  exparte order, the petitioner herein preferred E.P.No.410 of 1998 for<br \/>\nexecuting the order passed  by  the  learned  Rent  Controller;  that  in  the<br \/>\nExecution  Petition,  notices  were  sent  through  the  court to the tenanted<br \/>\npremises where the tenant was  allegedly  carrying  on  the  business  of  her<br \/>\ndeceased  husband; that the said notice was returned with the same endorsement<br \/>\n&#8220;Door locked&#8221;; that pursuant to this, a notice was once again  served  through<br \/>\nsubstituted  service;  that since the tenant failed to appear either in person<br \/>\nor through a pleader, delivery orders were passed in the Execution Petition on<br \/>\n7.1.1999 ordering delivery of possession of the premises  to  the  petitioner;<br \/>\nthat  pursuant  to this the authorised person of the petitioner along with the<br \/>\nbailiff took possession of the tenanted premises on 13.1.1999.\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.  It further comes to be known that  pursuant  to  the  delivery  of<br \/>\npossession,  the tenant had filed M.P.No.60 of 1999 and M.P.No.800 of 200 0 in<br \/>\nE.P.No.410 of 1998 respectively praying to set aside the exparte orders  dated<br \/>\n26.6.1998 and 7.1.1999 and for re-delivery of possession on the ground that no<br \/>\nnotice was  served on her either in the R.C.O.P.  or in the execution petition<br \/>\nand that she came to know about the proceedings only after the bailiff came to<br \/>\ntake possession of the tenanted premises; that the Rent Controller by a common<br \/>\norder dated 18.4.2001 dismissed both the petitions on the ground that when the<br \/>\nbailiff went to the petition premises, the tenant&#8217;s grandson,  the  respondent<br \/>\nherein  was present and without any resistance had handed over the possession,<br \/>\nagainst which the tenant had preferred R.C.A.No.329 of 20 01 and  R.C.A.No.335<br \/>\nof  2001;  that  the  Rent  Control  Appellate Authority by its judgment dated<br \/>\n11.3.2003 set aside the order of the learned Rent  Controller  on  the  ground<br \/>\nthat  the petitioner herein had committed fraud by taking notice to an address<br \/>\ndifferent from that of the tenanted  premises  and  while  setting  aside  the<br \/>\nexparte orders passed both in the RCOP and the Execution Petition has directed<br \/>\nthe Rent Controller to dispose of the R.C.O.P.  within two months.  It is only<br \/>\ntestifying  the  judgment  and decree of the learned Rent Controller Appellate<br \/>\nAuthority, the petitioner herein has come forward to file both the above Civil<br \/>\nRevision Petitions on certain grounds as  brought  forth  in  the  grounds  of<br \/>\nrevision.\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.   A careful perusal of the entire materials placed on record in the<br \/>\nlight of the submissions of both sides,  would  reveal  that  challenging  the<br \/>\nexparte  orders  passed  both  in  the  RCOP  and the execution petition filed<br \/>\ntherein, the tenant has taken out the present proceedings.  It  is  seen  from<br \/>\nthe  records  that  the  landlady  has  taken  the notices in the RCOP and the<br \/>\nExecution Petition  to  an  address  which  is  different  from  the  tenanted<br \/>\npremises,  where  the tenant is residing and has obtained the exparte order of<br \/>\neviction and delivery of possession.  Further more, it is a well  settled  law<br \/>\nnow  that no party should be denied of opportunity to contest the case wherein<br \/>\ntheir substantial rights are involved.  While the  Rent  Controller  has  lost<br \/>\nsight  of  the  facts  of  the case and the settled propositions of law on the<br \/>\nsubject the Rent Control Appellate Authority, having gone into the  matter  in<br \/>\ndepth  and  appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case in the manner<br \/>\nrequired by law and applying the said legal proposition  has  arrived  at  the<br \/>\nconclusion  thereby  setting  aside the exparte orders passed both in the RCOP<br \/>\nand in the Execution Petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>        6.  The stand taken by the revision petitioner that the respondent was<br \/>\nvery well present when the possession was taken by the landlady  cannot  be  a<br \/>\nground to deny the opportunity for the tenant to contest the case particularly<br \/>\nwhen  it  is  the  case  of the tenant that only when the bailiff came to take<br \/>\npossession of the tenanted premises, she was given to understand  the  exparte<br \/>\norder obtained by the landlady.\n<\/p>\n<p>        7.   Therefore,  the  Rent  Control  Appellate Authority has got every<br \/>\nreason to order setting aside the exparte orders and this Court is not able to<br \/>\nfind any error apparent on the face of the common judgment passed by the  Rent<br \/>\nControl  Appellate Authority and therefore this Court does not find any reason<br \/>\nto interfere with the well considered and merited  decision  rendered  by  the<br \/>\nRent  Control  Appellate Authority and both the above Civil Revision Petitions<br \/>\nare liable only to be set aside and hence the following order:<br \/>\nIn result,\n<\/p>\n<p>(i) both the above Civil Revision Petitions do not merit acceptance  and  they<br \/>\nbecome liable only to be dismissed and are dismissed accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii)  The common judgment and decrees dated 11.3.2003 respectively rendered in<br \/>\nR.C.A.Nos.329 and 335 of 2001 by the Rent  Control  Appellate  Authority  (VII<br \/>\nSmall  Causes  Judge),  Chennai thereby reversing the fair and decretal orders<br \/>\ndated 18.4.2001 respectively made in C.M.P.No.6 0 of 1999  and  M.P.No.800  of<br \/>\n2000 in R.E.P.No.410 of 1998 in R.C.O.P.  No.88 of 1998 by the Rent Controller<br \/>\n(XVI Small Causes Judge), Chennai is hereby confirmed.\n<\/p>\n<p>(iii)  The  Rent Controller is directed to comply with the direction issued by<br \/>\nthe Rent Control Appellate Authority in disposing of the R.C.O.P.   on  merits<br \/>\nand in accordance with law at the earliest.\n<\/p>\n<p>        However, in the circumstances of the cases, there shall be no order as<br \/>\nto costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>        Consequently, C.M.P.Nos.5605 and 5606 of 2004 are also dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index:  Yes\/No<\/p>\n<p>Internet:  Yes\/No<br \/>\ngr\/Rao<\/p>\n<p>To<br \/>\nThe Registrar,<br \/>\nSmall Causes Court,<br \/>\nChennai.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court P.Meenakshiammal vs G.Muralidharan on 21 September, 2004 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:21\/9\/2004 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.KANAGARAJ. CIVIL REVISION PETITION (NPD)NOS.705 of 2004 AND CRP NPD. 706 of 2004 AND C.M.P.NOS.5605 AND 5606 OF 2004 P.Meenakshiammal &#8230; Petitioner -Vs- G.Muralidharan &#8230; Respondent Civil Revision Petitions filed under Section [&hellip;]<\/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-86701","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>P.Meenakshiammal vs G.Muralidharan on 21 September, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"P.Meenakshiammal vs G.Muralidharan on 21 September, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2004-09-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-08T17:45:50+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"P.Meenakshiammal vs G.Muralidharan on 21 September, 2004\",\"datePublished\":\"2004-09-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-08T17:45:50+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004\"},\"wordCount\":1350,\"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\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004\",\"name\":\"P.Meenakshiammal vs G.Muralidharan on 21 September, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2004-09-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-08T17:45:50+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"P.Meenakshiammal vs G.Muralidharan on 21 September, 2004\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"P.Meenakshiammal vs G.Muralidharan on 21 September, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"P.Meenakshiammal vs G.Muralidharan on 21 September, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2004-09-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-08T17:45:50+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"P.Meenakshiammal vs G.Muralidharan on 21 September, 2004","datePublished":"2004-09-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-08T17:45:50+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004"},"wordCount":1350,"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\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004","name":"P.Meenakshiammal vs G.Muralidharan on 21 September, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2004-09-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-08T17:45:50+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-meenakshiammal-vs-g-muralidharan-on-21-september-2004#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"P.Meenakshiammal vs G.Muralidharan on 21 September, 2004"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/86701","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=86701"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86701\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=86701"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=86701"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=86701"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}