{"id":89361,"date":"2005-08-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-08-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2"},"modified":"2015-04-23T14:13:11","modified_gmt":"2015-04-23T08:43:11","slug":"d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2","title":{"rendered":"D.Geetha vs D.Thulsasi Ammal on 18 August, 2005"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">D.Geetha vs D.Thulsasi Ammal on 18 August, 2005<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS           \n\nDATED: 18\/08\/2005  \n\nCORAM   \n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.KARPAGAVINAYAGAM                \n\nAND  \n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AR.RAMALINGAM             \n\n\nCONTEMPT APPEAL No.9 OF 2003       \n\n1.D.Geetha \n2.Swamidurai                    ....                    Appellants\n\n-Vs-\n\nD.Thulsasi Ammal               ....                    Respondent\n\n\n\n                Appeal under Section 19 (1) of  the  Contempt  of  Courts  Act\nagainst  the  order dated 17.07.2003, made in Contempt Petition No.183 of 2003\non the file of this Court.\n\n!For appellants :  Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan\n\n^For respondent :  Mr.Mohan,\n                assisted by Mr.V.T.Balaji\n\n\n\n:JUDGMENT   \n<\/pre>\n<p>M.KARPAGAVINAYAGAM,J.\n<\/p>\n<p>                In a Contempt Petition filed by  D.Thulasi  Ammal,  mother,  a<br \/>\nlearned  single  Judge  of  this  Court  found  D.Geetha,  daughter, guilty of<br \/>\ncontempt for having disobeyed the order of the  learned  single  Judge,  dated<br \/>\n24.01.2003,  and  sentenced  her  to  pay a fine of Rs.1,000\/-; in default, to<br \/>\nundergo simple imprisonment for a period  of  two  weeks.    Hence,  D.Geetha,<br \/>\ndaughter,   along   with  her  husband  Swamidurai,  has  filed  this  appeal,<br \/>\nchallenging the order of the learned single Judge.\n<\/p>\n<p>                2.  The brief facts are as follows :\n<\/p>\n<p>                &#8221; (a) D.Geetha, first appellant, is the daughter of  D.Thulasi<br \/>\nAmmal, respondent herein.  She filed a suit in O.S.No.6155 of 2001 on the file<br \/>\nof  XV  Assistant  Judge,  City  Civil  Court,  Chennai,  for  declaration and<br \/>\ninjunction in respect of the suit property.  She also filed I.  A.No.18148  of<br \/>\n2001 for temporary injunction against her mother.\n<\/p>\n<p>                (b)  As  a counter blast, Thulasi Ammal, filed another suit in<br \/>\nO.S.  No.5798 of 2002 on the file of the XV Assistant Judge, City Civil Court,<br \/>\nChennai.    Both   the   suits   were   directed   to   be   tried   together.<br \/>\nMother\/respondent  herein  also  filed  I.A.No.18422  of 2002 in the suit O.S.<br \/>\nNo.5798 of 2002 for  interim  injunction  and  the  same  was  granted  on  18<br \/>\n.11.2002.   The  application for temporary injunction filed by the daughter in<br \/>\nI.A.No.18148 of 2001 in O.S.No.6155 of 2001  was  dismissed  on  19  .11.2002.<br \/>\nThough interim injunction was granted on 18.11.2002 in favour of the mother in<br \/>\nO.S.No.5798  of  2002,  the same was not extended in the next hearing i.e., on<br \/>\n26.11.2002, as the mandatory procedures  with  reference  to  the  service  of<br \/>\nsummons and  payment  of  batta  had  not  been  complied  with.   Against the<br \/>\nnon-extension of the order, mother filed C.R.P.No.2112 of 2002 on the file  of<br \/>\nthis  High  Court and a learned single Judge of this Court, by the order dated<br \/>\n24.01.2003 in C.R.P.  No.2112 of 2002, extended the interim injunction, passed<br \/>\nby the trial Court on 18.11.2002, and directed the trial  Court  to  hear  the<br \/>\nparties and  finally  dispose  of  the I.A.No.18422 of 2002.  In the meantime,<br \/>\ndaughter\/plaintiff in the other suit, namely, O.S.No.6155 of 2001, as  against<br \/>\nthe  order  dismissing  the  injunction application in I.A.No.181 4 8 of 2001,<br \/>\ndated 19.11.2002, filed C.M.A.No.11 of 2003 on  the  file  of  III  Additional<br \/>\nJudge, City Civil Court, Chennai.\n<\/p>\n<p>                (c)  When  the  C.M.A.was  admitted  on  31.01.2003 by the III<br \/>\nAdditional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, the  fact  that  the  High  Court<br \/>\npassed   an  order  in  C.R.P.No.2112  of  2002,  dated  24.01.2003,  granting<br \/>\ninjunction in favour of mother in respect of the suit property was not brought<br \/>\nto the notice.  However, when the C.M.A.  was taken up for final  disposal  on<br \/>\nservice  of  notice  on  the other side, counsel for the mother, respondent in<br \/>\nC.M.A., brought to the notice of the III  Additional  Judge  that  already  an<br \/>\norder was  passed  by  the High Court in C.R.P.  No.2112 of 2002 on 24.01.2003<br \/>\nextending the injunction granted in favour of the mother  and,  as  such,  the<br \/>\ndaughter,  in  respect  of  the  same  property,  would not be entitled to the<br \/>\ninjunction in the other suit, filed by her.  In spite of that, the learned III<br \/>\nAdditional Judge, by an order dated 05.03.2003, overruled the objection raised<br \/>\nby the learned counsel for the mother and, disregarding the order of the  High<br \/>\nCourt  dated  24.01.2003,  granted  injunction  in  favour of the daughter, in<br \/>\nrespect of the same property.\n<\/p>\n<p>                (d) Hence, the mother filed a Contempt Petition on the file of<br \/>\nthis Court against her daughter and her husband, for having  filed  injunction<br \/>\napplication in  C.M.A.    and  seeking  for injunction, thereby disobeying the<br \/>\norder of injunction passed by the High  Court  on  24.01.2003.    The  learned<br \/>\nsingle  Judge,  after  hearing the parties and perusing the records, found the<br \/>\ndaughter guilty of contempt and imposed fine as stated above.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>                3.  Challenging the said finding, Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan,  learned<br \/>\ncounsel  for  the  daughter\/appellants,  would  submit  that  the right of the<br \/>\ndaughter in challenging the order of dismissal in injunction application dated<br \/>\n19.11.2002 in her  suit  by  pursuing  her  remedy  through  C.M.A  cannot  be<br \/>\nprevented and, as such, she cannot be held guilty of contempt.\n<\/p>\n<p>                4.   In  justification  of  the  order impugned of the learned<br \/>\nsingle Judge, Mr.Mohan, learned counsel appearing for  the  mother\/respondent,<br \/>\nwould  submit  that  the  learned single Judge has given proper reasonings for<br \/>\nholding the first appellant guilty and, therefore, the act of  the  appellant,<br \/>\nin  having  gone  to  the III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, and<br \/>\nobtained an order of injunction, which is a counter to the injunction  already<br \/>\ngranted by the High Court, would amount to contempt and, as such, the order of<br \/>\nthe learned  single  Judge  is  perfectly valid.  He would further submit that<br \/>\nwhen there is an  order  by  the  High  Court  in  C.R.P.No.2112  of  2002  on<br \/>\n24.01.2003  with regard to the same parties and same properties, it is totally<br \/>\nwrong and an error committed by the learned III Additional  Judge  in  sitting<br \/>\nover  an  appeal  on  the  order  passed by the High Court and, hence, the III<br \/>\nAdditional Judge has exceeded the jurisdiction  in  interpreting  the  orders,<br \/>\npassed by the High Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>                5.   We  have carefully considered the submissions made by the<br \/>\nlearned counsel for the parties and also gone  through  the  records  and  the<br \/>\norder impugned, passed by the learned single Judge, dated 17.07.2003.\n<\/p>\n<p>                6.   There  is  no  dispute in the fact that both daughter and<br \/>\nmother have filed separate suits in O.S.No.6155 of 2001 and 5798  of  2002  in<br \/>\nrespect of the same property.  Though the trial Judge had originally passed an<br \/>\norder  of  injunction  in  favour  of  mother  in  I.A.No.18422  of  20  02 on<br \/>\n18.11.2002, he did not extend the injunction, in view of the fact  that  Order<br \/>\n39 Rule  3  CPC  was  not  complied  with.  The trial Court also dismissed the<br \/>\ninjunction application filed by the daughter in I.    A.No.18148  of  2001  in<br \/>\nO.S.No.6155 of 2001, by the order dated 19.11.2 0 02.\n<\/p>\n<p>                7.   It  is also not debated that the order, not extending the<br \/>\ninjunction in favour of the mother, was challenged by  the  mother  in  C.R.P.<br \/>\nNo.2112  of 2002 and, after hearing both sides, this Court, by the order dated<br \/>\n24.01.2003,  extended  the  interim  injunction  in  favour  of  the   mother,<br \/>\nrestraining the daughter and her husband from disturbing the possession of the<br \/>\nmother  in  respect of the suit property till the disposal of the I.A.No.18422<br \/>\nof 2002 in O.S.No.5798 of 2002, filed by the mother.   Admittedly,  as  stated<br \/>\nabove, this  order  was  passed  only  after hearing both the parties.  Having<br \/>\nknown about this  order,  the  daughter,  against  the  order  dismissing  the<br \/>\ninjunction application  in  I.A.  No.18148 of 2001 in O.S.No.6155 of 2001, had<br \/>\nchosen to file C.M.A.No.11 of 2003.    On  the  date  of  admission  i.e.,  on<br \/>\n31.01.2003,  the order of injunction granted by the High Court was not brought<br \/>\nto the notice  of  the  III  Additional  Judge,  City  Civil  Court,  Chennai.<br \/>\nTherefore, the   C.M.A.    was  entertained  and  injunction  was  granted  on<br \/>\n05.03.2003.  Thus, it is clear that there was a suppression of  the  order  of<br \/>\ninjunction passed by the High Court in respect of the same property.\n<\/p>\n<p>                8.   But,  the  unfortunate  thing  to be noticed is, when the<br \/>\nmother, other side in the said C.M.A., contested the C.M.A.    mainly  on  the<br \/>\nground  that  already  there  was  injunction in her favour passed by the High<br \/>\nCourt on 24.01.2003, the learned III Additional Judge, ignoring the injunction<br \/>\norder passed by the High Court and knowing fully well that the properties  and<br \/>\nthe  parties  are  one  and the same, allowed the appeal, granting an order of<br \/>\ninjunction in favour of the daughter.  Thus, it is clear that the order of the<br \/>\nIII Additional Judge, dated 05 .03.2003, in C.M.A.No.11 of 2003 is  a  counter<br \/>\ninjunction  to  the  order  of  the  learned single Judge of this Court, dated<br \/>\n24.01.2003, in C.R.P.  No.2112 of 2002.\n<\/p>\n<p>                9.  The daughter, contemner, having known about the  order  of<br \/>\nthe High Court, insisted on the injunction, by making a representation through<br \/>\nher  lawyer  to the extent of advancing argument that the order of the learned<br \/>\nsingle Judge of this Court was not a reasoned order and, therefore, that could<br \/>\nbe ignored.\n<\/p>\n<p>                10.  As correctly pointed out by  the  learned  single  Judge,<br \/>\nthis is nothing but a contempt.  Though it is stated by the contemner that the<br \/>\nright  of  filing  appeal  against the order in dismissing her application for<br \/>\ninjunction in the suit, cannot be prevented, it is to be noticed  that  asking<br \/>\nfor injunction  in  her  favour  in  C.M.A.    would amount to praying the III<br \/>\nAdditional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, who is a subordinate to the  High<br \/>\nCourt,  to  pass an order of injunction in her favour, which would nullify the<br \/>\neffect of the injunction order, granted in favour of her mother  by  the  High<br \/>\nCourt.   So, on these reasonings, the learned single Judge correctly concluded<br \/>\nthat the daughter\/ first appellant herein  committed  contempt  of  the  order<br \/>\npassed by this Court on 24.01.2003, by obtaining an order of injunction, which<br \/>\nruns counter to the injunction granted by the High Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>                11.   During the pendency of the appeal, it was brought to the<br \/>\nnotice of this Court by the learned counsel for the respondent that  the  very<br \/>\nfact that the III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, had gone to the<br \/>\nextent  of  granting injunction, by exceeding his jurisdiction in interpreting<br \/>\nthe orders of this Court dated  24.01.200  3,  would  indicate  that  the  III<br \/>\nAdditional  Judge  also  committed a serious misconduct, which would amount to<br \/>\ninsubordination and contempt.  We find force in this submission.\n<\/p>\n<p>                12.  Therefore, this Court directed the III Additional  Judge,<br \/>\nCity Civil Court, Chennai, to give explanation with reference to the above, to<br \/>\nenable  this  Court  to  take  further action for contempt or insubordination.<br \/>\nAccordingly, this Court received  the  explanation  from  him,  in  which  the<br \/>\nlearned Judge stated that since there was no order of stay in disposing of the<br \/>\nC.M.A.No.11  of  2003 in the order dated 24.01 .2 003 made in C.R.P.No.2112 of<br \/>\n2002, he disposed of the appeal  on  merits.    Whether  this  explanation  is<br \/>\nsatisfactory  or  not,  it  would  be  better  to  deal  with  it  in separate<br \/>\nproceedings.\n<\/p>\n<p>                13.  As far  as  this  case  is  concerned,  the  act  of  the<br \/>\ndaughter,  first appellant herein, in approaching the III Additional Judge and<br \/>\ninsisting for the interim injunction and obtaining the same, which  would  run<br \/>\ncounter  to  the  injunction granted by the High Court, by mentioning that the<br \/>\norder of the High Court was not passed  properly  by  giving  proper  reasons,<br \/>\nwould,  in  our  view,  amount  to contempt of the order passed by the learned<br \/>\nsingle Judge of this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>                14.  The learned single Judge, in his order,  while  referring<br \/>\nto  the  order  passed by the III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai,<br \/>\nhas observed that the procedure adopted and the action of the  III  Additional<br \/>\nJudge  in  allowing  the  appeal  and granting injunction knowing well that it<br \/>\nwould run counter to the order of this Court dated 24 .01  .2003,  are  to  be<br \/>\ndeprecated.  However, he did not choose to pursue the action against the Judge<br \/>\nconcerned,  though  he  held  that  seeking for injunction and granting of the<br \/>\nsame, which would run counter to the injunction granted  by  the  High  Court,<br \/>\nwould amount to misconduct.\n<\/p>\n<p>                15.  While confirming the finding of the learned single Judge,<br \/>\nwe  sincerely  feel that we should not keep quiet when a subordinate Judge has<br \/>\nsimply ignored the order of the High Court and passed an order  in  favour  of<br \/>\none  party,  which  would  nullify  the effect of the order passed by the High<br \/>\nCourt.  Therefore, we intend to  initiate  separate  proceedings  against  the<br \/>\nofficer concerned.\n<\/p>\n<p>                16.   In  our  view,  the  reasons given by the learned single<br \/>\nJudge for finding the daughter\/first appellant herein are perfectly justified.<br \/>\nHence, this Contempt Appeal is dismissed.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index :  Yes<br \/>\nInternet :  Yes<br \/>\ndixit<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court D.Geetha vs D.Thulsasi Ammal on 18 August, 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18\/08\/2005 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.KARPAGAVINAYAGAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AR.RAMALINGAM CONTEMPT APPEAL No.9 OF 2003 1.D.Geetha 2.Swamidurai &#8230;. Appellants -Vs- D.Thulsasi Ammal &#8230;. Respondent Appeal under Section 19 (1) of the Contempt of Courts [&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-89361","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 v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>D.Geetha vs D.Thulsasi Ammal on 18 August, 2005 - 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\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"D.Geetha vs D.Thulsasi Ammal on 18 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2\" \/>\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=\"2005-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-04-23T08:43:11+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"D.Geetha vs D.Thulsasi Ammal on 18 August, 2005\",\"datePublished\":\"2005-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-23T08:43:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2\"},\"wordCount\":1996,\"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\\\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2\",\"name\":\"D.Geetha vs D.Thulsasi Ammal on 18 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2005-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-23T08:43:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"D.Geetha vs D.Thulsasi Ammal on 18 August, 2005\"}]},{\"@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":"D.Geetha vs D.Thulsasi Ammal on 18 August, 2005 - 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\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"D.Geetha vs D.Thulsasi Ammal on 18 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2005-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-04-23T08:43:11+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"D.Geetha vs D.Thulsasi Ammal on 18 August, 2005","datePublished":"2005-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-23T08:43:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2"},"wordCount":1996,"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\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2","name":"D.Geetha vs D.Thulsasi Ammal on 18 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2005-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-23T08:43:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/d-geetha-vs-d-thulsasi-ammal-on-18-august-2005-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"D.Geetha vs D.Thulsasi Ammal on 18 August, 2005"}]},{"@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\/89361","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=89361"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/89361\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=89361"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=89361"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=89361"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}