{"id":90311,"date":"2003-07-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-07-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003"},"modified":"2017-12-14T14:26:23","modified_gmt":"2017-12-14T08:56:23","slug":"palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003","title":{"rendered":"Palanichamy vs Rajalakshmi on 14 July, 2003"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Palanichamy vs Rajalakshmi on 14 July, 2003<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED: 14\/07\/2003\n\nCORAM\n\nTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.V.BALASUBRAMANIAN\nAND\nTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AR.RAMALINGAM\n\nA.S.No.482 of 1989\n\n\nPalanichamy                    .....           Appellant\n\n-Vs-\n\n1. Rajalakshmi\n2. Minor Sivashanmugham\n3. Minor Sumathi\n   (RR 2 and 3 rep. By guardian R1)\n\n4. Subramaniam\n5. Periasamy\n6. Chinnuammal @ Rakkammal\n7. Kaliammal\n8. Palaniammal\n9. Nallammal\n10. Ramasamy Gounder\n11. Karuppannan                 .....           Respondents\n\n\n        Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 4.2.1988 in O.S.No.87  of\n1986 on the file of the Sub Court, Namakkal.\n\n\n!For appellant :  Mr.C.S.Krishnamoorthy\n\n^For RR 1 to 3  :  Mr.N.Varadarajan for\n                Mr.T.K.Subba Rao\n\nFor R8          :  Mr.N.Manokaran\n\nFor other\nrespondents     :  No appearance.\n\n\n:JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>AR.RAMALINGAM,J.\n<\/p>\n<p>        This  appeal  has been filed by the 8th defendant viz., one Palanisamy<br \/>\nagainst the finding given under issue No.8 in the judgment rendered by the Sub<br \/>\nJudge, Namakkal in O.S.No.87 of 1986 on 4.2.1988.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.  As per the plaint  of  the  plaintiffs  viz.,  Rajalakshmi,  Minor<br \/>\nSivashanmugam  and Minor Sumathi respectively being the wife, son and daughter<br \/>\nof the first defendant Subramaniam the prayer is for maintenance and partition<br \/>\nof plaint schedule properties.  The suit was resisted by  all  the  defendants<br \/>\nand  particularly the appellant\/8th defendant has contested the suit by saying<br \/>\nthat he has purchased 59 cents within the extent  of  one  acre  18  cents  in<br \/>\nSurvey  No.81\/1C  shown  as  item  No.7  of  the  plaint schedule for valuable<br \/>\nconsideration of Rs.30,000\/= through a registered  sale  deed  dated  2.9.1976<br \/>\nfrom defendants 1 to 3 who are none other than the husband, brother in law and<br \/>\nmother  in law of the first plaintiff Rajalakshmi and that he is the bona fide<br \/>\npurchaser for valuable consideration and particularly   his purchase  is  true<br \/>\nand bona fide one supported by his conduct of discharging the antecedent debts<br \/>\nincurred  not only by the first defendant but also by the second defendant for<br \/>\nthe purpose of family benefit and improvement  of  landed  properties  of  the<br \/>\njoint family.\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.   However,  this stand of the 8th defendant was not accepted by the<br \/>\nSub Judge, Namakkal and he gave the finding under issue  No.8  to  the  effect<br \/>\nthat  the  purchase  made by the 8th defendant was not true, valid and binding<br \/>\nupon the plaintiffs and particularly the share of the minor second  plaintiff.<br \/>\nAggrieved  against  such  a  finding,  this  appeal  has been preferred by the<br \/>\nappellant\/8th defendant.\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.  The only point for consideration in this  appeal  is  whether  the<br \/>\nsale  deed  executed  by  defendants  1  to  3  in favour of the appellant\/8th<br \/>\ndefendant covered by Ex.B8 is true, valid and binding upon the plaintiffs.\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.  Fortunately or unfortunately, the other  defendants  against  whom<br \/>\nfindings have been given have not come forward with any appeal.  However, this<br \/>\nappeal  is  confined  so  far  as  it relates to item 7 of the plaint schedule<br \/>\ncovered by Ex.B8 in favour of the appellant\/8th defendant.\n<\/p>\n<p>        6.  On careful perusal of Ex.B8 sale deed, we are able to see that the<br \/>\nsame is a registered document which was registered on 2.9.1976 itself  and  it<br \/>\nhas  been  executed  not  only  by  the  first  defendant  but also the second<br \/>\ndefendant Periyasamy and their mother the third  defendant  Chinnuammal  alias<br \/>\nRakkammal.   Even  as per the pleadings and evidence of PW1 viz., Rajalakshmi,<br \/>\nit is clear that the  dispute  between  herself  and  her  husband  the  first<br \/>\ndefendant arose  only subsequent to the year 1976.  In this context, it has to<br \/>\nbe pointed out that if really the husband of the  first  plaintiff  viz.,  the<br \/>\nfirst  defendant  was  not alright in his activities morally or otherwise, the<br \/>\nother joint owners or  sharers  viz.,  the  second  defendant  and  the  third<br \/>\ndefendant  could  not  have  executed  such  a  sale deed in favour of the 8th<br \/>\ndefendant along with the first defendant.  On the other hand,  it  has  to  be<br \/>\npointed  out  that  all the three have jointly executed the sale deed only for<br \/>\nthe purpose of discharging the debts incurred by  the  first  defendant  as  a<br \/>\njoint  family  member and the joint debt incurred by the second defendant also<br \/>\nand thereby such a sale deed cannot be easily viewed as if it  is  a  document<br \/>\nout of connivance among defendants 1 to 3 with ulterior motive of avoiding the<br \/>\nrights of  the  plaintiffs  upon the said property.  Moreover, if the recitals<br \/>\nand details of the consideration for Ex.B8 are looked into, we are able to see<br \/>\nthat the said document came into existence only for the purpose of discharging<br \/>\nthe pro note debt due to one Veerappa Gounder  (DW4)  dated  1  6.12.1974  for<br \/>\nRs.5000\/=, pro note debt due to the 8th defendant, purchaser himself for Rs.10<br \/>\n,000\/=  dated  28.3.1976, pro note debt due to one Kuzhanthai Paian ( DW5) for<br \/>\nRs.1500\/= and the pro note debt  due  to  one  Palaniappa  Gounder  (DW8)  for<br \/>\nRs.2000\/= dated  17.5.1975.  Further, we are able to see that those debts have<br \/>\nbeen discharged by the 8th defendant himself and evidencing  such  discharges,<br \/>\nthe  discharged  pro  notes  have  been  filed  and  marked as Exs.B10 to B13.<br \/>\nFurther, defendants 1 to 3 have also received a sum of  Rs.5,000\/=,  Rs.4500\/=<br \/>\nand Rs.2000\/= in cash before the Sub Registrar as evidenced by the endorsement<br \/>\nmade by  the  Sub  Registrar  in  Ex.B8  itself.    Therefore,  it  is  highly<br \/>\nunbelievable and improbable to contend that Ex.B8 is a document  created  with<br \/>\nulterior motive  to  avoid  the  rights of the plaintiffs.  On the other hand,<br \/>\nEx.B8 has been  clearly  proved  regarding  its  due  execution  for  valuable<br \/>\nconsideration  as  well  as  the  purpose  of  execution  for  discharging the<br \/>\nantecedent debts and for the purpose of improving the landed properties and so<br \/>\non.  There is no reason to suspect or  disbelieve  the  evidence  of  the  8th<br \/>\ndefendant as DW3 and the evidence of D.Ws.4, 5 and 8 followed by Ex.B8 and the<br \/>\nsaid discharged pro notes.\n<\/p>\n<p>        7.   Therefore,  it  is  very  easy for anybody like the plaintiffs to<br \/>\nattribute any ulterior motive for any document for the convenience  of  filing<br \/>\nsuit for  partition,  etc.    In  this  case, Ex.B8 is a document for valuable<br \/>\nconsideration entered into by a bona fide purchaser viz., the  8th  defendant.<br \/>\nSo,  the  observation  and  view  expressed by the Sub Judge, Namakkal for the<br \/>\npurpose of giving finding against Ex.B8, in our  view,  are  not  correct  and<br \/>\njustified.  Consequently, such a finding has to be set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>        8.   Accordingly,  we  are  of  the view that there are acceptable and<br \/>\nsufficient grounds to allow this appeal and thereby the appeal is allowed  and<br \/>\nthe  finding of the Sub Judge, Namakkal so far as it relates to Ex.B8 document<br \/>\n(standing in favour of the appellant\/8th defendant) is set aside.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index:  Yes<br \/>\nInternet:  Yes<\/p>\n<p>ssk.\n<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.  The Subordinate Judge,<br \/>\nNamakkal.  (with records)<\/p>\n<p>2.  The Record Keeper,<br \/>\nV.R.  Section,<br \/>\nHigh Court, Chennai.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Palanichamy vs Rajalakshmi on 14 July, 2003 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 14\/07\/2003 CORAM THE HON&#8217;BLE MR.JUSTICE N.V.BALASUBRAMANIAN AND THE HON&#8217;BLE MR.JUSTICE AR.RAMALINGAM A.S.No.482 of 1989 Palanichamy &#8230;.. Appellant -Vs- 1. Rajalakshmi 2. Minor Sivashanmugham 3. Minor Sumathi (RR 2 and 3 rep. By guardian R1) 4. Subramaniam [&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-90311","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 v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Palanichamy vs Rajalakshmi on 14 July, 2003 - 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\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Palanichamy vs Rajalakshmi on 14 July, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003\" \/>\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=\"2003-07-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-14T08:56:23+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Palanichamy vs Rajalakshmi on 14 July, 2003\",\"datePublished\":\"2003-07-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-14T08:56:23+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003\"},\"wordCount\":1013,\"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\\\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003\",\"name\":\"Palanichamy vs Rajalakshmi on 14 July, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2003-07-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-14T08:56:23+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Palanichamy vs Rajalakshmi on 14 July, 2003\"}]},{\"@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":"Palanichamy vs Rajalakshmi on 14 July, 2003 - 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\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Palanichamy vs Rajalakshmi on 14 July, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2003-07-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-14T08:56:23+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Palanichamy vs Rajalakshmi on 14 July, 2003","datePublished":"2003-07-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-14T08:56:23+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003"},"wordCount":1013,"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\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003","name":"Palanichamy vs Rajalakshmi on 14 July, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2003-07-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-14T08:56:23+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/palanichamy-vs-rajalakshmi-on-14-july-2003#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Palanichamy vs Rajalakshmi on 14 July, 2003"}]},{"@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\/90311","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=90311"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/90311\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=90311"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=90311"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=90311"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}