{"id":94671,"date":"2008-03-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-03-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008"},"modified":"2019-03-23T04:02:47","modified_gmt":"2019-03-22T22:32:47","slug":"t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008","title":{"rendered":"T.P.Mohammed Alias Babu vs Mohan John Mathew on 13 March, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
T.P.Mohammed Alias Babu vs Mohan John Mathew on 13 March, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRSA No. 93 of 2008()\n\n\n1. T.P.MOHAMMED ALIAS BABU\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. MOHAN JOHN MATHEW,S\/O.,Y.W.MATHEW\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.VINOD BHAT\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR\n\n Dated :13\/03\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n              M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.\n            ===========================\n             R.S.A. NO. 93     OF 2008\n            ===========================\n\n      Dated this the 13th day of March, 2008\n\n                     JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
    First plaintiff in O.S.1574\/1999 on the file of<\/p>\n
Munsiff Court, Thiruvananthapuram is the appellant.<\/p>\n
Respondent is the defendant.  Second plaintiff died<\/p>\n
subsequent to the disposal of the first appeal.<\/p>\n
Appellant  along  with  deceased  second  plaintiff<\/p>\n
instituted the suit for declaration of title and<\/p>\n
putting up  boundary.  The plaint schedule property<\/p>\n
admittedly originally belonged to Elezebath Thomas.<\/p>\n
She has two daughters Victoria Mathew    and Emily<\/p>\n
Daniel.  Under Ext.B1, property was given to Emily<\/p>\n
Daniel.  Earlier under Ext.B2 property was given to<\/p>\n
Victoria Mathew.    The property obtained by Emily<\/p>\n
Daniel under Ext.B1 was purchased by the second<\/p>\n
plaintiff.  What is contended by the appellant was<\/p>\n
that out of 19 cents available with Elezabath<\/p>\n
Thomas, 4 cents was acquired for drainage and road<\/p>\n
and the balance 15 cents was obtained by Emily<\/p>\n
R.S.A.93\/08                  2<\/span><\/p>\n
Daniel under Ext.B1 and it was purchased by second<\/p>\n
plaintiff       under Ext.A1 and subsequently under<\/p>\n
Ext.A2 partition deed, that property was divided<\/p>\n
and the eastern 5.132 cents was allotted to the<\/p>\n
sister of appellant and the      western 9.868 cents is<\/p>\n
allotted to the appellant and appellant is in<\/p>\n
possession of the said property.       Plaint schedule<\/p>\n
property      is  claimed  to  be  that  9.868   cents.<\/p>\n
Contending that respondent has no right over the<\/p>\n
same,      appellant sought a decree for declaration of<\/p>\n
title      and  fixation  of   boundary  of  the   said<\/p>\n
property.      Respondent resisted the suit contending<\/p>\n
that after Ext.B2 transfer, Elizabath Thomas was<\/p>\n
not having 19 cents in her possession and the<\/p>\n
property given to Emily Daniel is only the property<\/p>\n
covered under the side measurements and it is not<\/p>\n
an extent of 15 cents and appellant has no        title<\/p>\n
to the plaint schedule property and the property<\/p>\n
which could be divided under Ext.A2 is only a<\/p>\n
lesser extent.\n<\/p>\n
      2. The trial court on the evidence of Pws.1 to<\/p>\n
R.S.A.93\/08                 3<\/span><\/p>\n
3, DW1, Exts.A1 to A4, B1 to B3, Exts.C1 to C2(a)<\/p>\n
found      that  before   Ext.B1,   Elizabath   Thomas<\/p>\n
transferred 19 cents of the property covered under<\/p>\n
Ext.B2 sale deed in 1097 M.E to Victoria Mathew<\/p>\n
and     only   the  balance   extent  available   with<\/p>\n
Elizabath Thomas was assigned under Ext.B1.       When<\/p>\n
Ext.B2      shows   the   extent   of   the   property<\/p>\n
transferred,      Ext.B1   only    shows   the    side<\/p>\n
measurements of the property.     If the extent of the<\/p>\n
property     is  fixed with   reference to   the  side<\/p>\n
measurement, it could only be 12.990 cents     and not<\/p>\n
15 cents. So       under Ext.A2 15 cents cannot be<\/p>\n
divided between the appellant and second plaintiff.<\/p>\n
If that be so, appellant cannot claim title to<\/p>\n
9.868 cents which is the plaint schedule property<\/p>\n
and so the boundary cannot be the one as shown by<\/p>\n
the Commissioner in Ext.C2(a) plan.          On these<\/p>\n
findings trial court dismissed the suit.     Appellant<\/p>\n
along with second plaintiff challenged the judgment<\/p>\n
before       Sub    Court,    Thiruvananthapuram    in<\/p>\n
A.S.35\/2003.     Learned Sub Judge on reappreciation<\/p>\n
R.S.A.93\/08                 4<\/span><\/p>\n
of evidence confirmed the findings of the learned<\/p>\n
Munsiff and dismissed the appeal.    It is challenged<\/p>\n
in the second appeal.\n<\/p>\n
      3.   Learned counsel appearing for appellant was<\/p>\n
heard.\n<\/p>\n
      4.   The argument of the learned counsel is that<\/p>\n
when there is     difference in the  extent and  side<\/p>\n
measurements,     courts below should not have fixed<\/p>\n
the      property  with   reference   to   the    side<\/p>\n
measurements and instead should have been fixed<\/p>\n
with reference to the extent shown in Exts.A1 and<\/p>\n
A2 and if so plaint schedule property as fixed by<\/p>\n
the Commissioner in Ext.C2(a) plan should have been<\/p>\n
upheld.     Learned counsel relied on the decision of<\/p>\n
a Division Bench of this Court in Savithri Ammal v.<\/p>\n
Padmavathi Amma<\/a> (1990(1) KLT 187)and argued that it<\/p>\n
is not the principle that    property could be   fixed<\/p>\n
only with reference to the side measurements and<\/p>\n
there is no invariable rule in this regard and the<\/p>\n
criterion    which  is  least  likely  to  have   been<\/p>\n
R.S.A.93\/08                5<\/span><\/p>\n
mistaken in the document is to be preferred.      It<\/p>\n
was argued that when Ext.A1 shows that the property<\/p>\n
transferred is 15 cents,    courts below should have<\/p>\n
upheld the title of        appellant to the plaint<\/p>\n
schedule property     and a decree should have been<\/p>\n
granted.     Learned counsel also argued that though<\/p>\n
respondent claimed right over the western portion<\/p>\n
of the plaint schedule property, his     title deed<\/p>\n
was not produced and though Ext.B2 was produced, no<\/p>\n
supporting document to trace out the title of the<\/p>\n
respondent was produced and without producing the<\/p>\n
title deed, respondent is not entitled to dispute<\/p>\n
the identity of the plaint schedule property as<\/p>\n
demarcated by the Commissioner and therefore a<\/p>\n
decree should have been granted.\n<\/p>\n
      5.   On hearing the learned counsel, I do not<\/p>\n
find     that any  substantial question  of  law  is<\/p>\n
involved in the appeal.\n<\/p>\n
      6.   True, there is no invariable rule that a<\/p>\n
particular mode has to be adopted to fix the<\/p>\n
property when there is dispute with regard to the<\/p>\n
R.S.A.93\/08                6<\/span><\/p>\n
extent,     boundary or    side  measurements  in  a<\/p>\n
document.     The principle is that when one of the<\/p>\n
description is vague and uncertain and another<\/p>\n
description is definite and certain, the    latter is<\/p>\n
to    be   preferred.   Similarly  if  none  of   the<\/p>\n
descriptions      is  vague   or   uncertain,    that<\/p>\n
description which is more certain and stable and<\/p>\n
least likely to have been mistaken or inserted<\/p>\n
inadvertantly     must  be   preferred,  if   it   is<\/p>\n
sufficiently identifies the subject matter of the<\/p>\n
transaction.       The other  descriptions  must   be<\/p>\n
rejected as erroneous or inaccurate.<\/p>\n
      7. If the property covered under Ext.A1 could<\/p>\n
be fixed with reference to the boundaries and such<\/p>\n
identification is more certain and stable and least<\/p>\n
likely to have been mistaken then the property<\/p>\n
could be fixed with reference to the boundaries or<\/p>\n
extent as canvassed by learned counsel appearing<\/p>\n
for appellant.      Admittedly the property covered<\/p>\n
under Ext.A1 sale deed is the property obtained<\/p>\n
under Ext.B1.    The property covered under Ext.B1 is<\/p>\n
R.S.A.93\/08                 7<\/span><\/p>\n
the property which lies to the east of the property<\/p>\n
covered under Ext.B2.     When the western boundary of<\/p>\n
the property covered under Ext.A1 is the property<\/p>\n
in the possession of the respondent and not any<\/p>\n
physical boundary, property cannot be fixed with<\/p>\n
reference to the boundary.       Even if the western<\/p>\n
boundary is further east or west of the western<\/p>\n
boundary fixed by Commissioner, it will be the<\/p>\n
property of respondent.\n<\/p>\n
      8. It is admitted case      that before Ext.B1,<\/p>\n
Elizebath Thomas transferred 19 cents          covered<\/p>\n
under     Ext.B2 in   1097  M.E  to  Victoria  Mathew.<\/p>\n
Subsequently the remaining property was transferred<\/p>\n
under Ext.B1 gift deed.     When Ext.B2 shows that the<\/p>\n
property is described with reference to           side<\/p>\n
measurements and extent, Ext.B1 shows that property<\/p>\n
is described only in     side measurements and not by<\/p>\n
extent.     What could be claimed under Ext.B1 is only<\/p>\n
the property,     excluding the property covered under<\/p>\n
Ext.B2.     When the second plaintiff purchased the<\/p>\n
property     under   Ext.A1,  apart     from      side<\/p>\n
R.S.A.93\/08                8<\/span><\/p>\n
measurements extent was shown as    15 cents  stating<\/p>\n
that out of 19 cents obtained under Ext.B1 4 cents<\/p>\n
was lost for drainage and road and it is the<\/p>\n
balance.      When Ext.B1 does not provide the extent<\/p>\n
obtained by the donee, appellant who claims under<\/p>\n
that donee cannot claim that the mistake is with<\/p>\n
regard to the side measurements and the     extent is<\/p>\n
correct.       It cannot  be  disputed  that  if  the<\/p>\n
property is identified with reference to the side<\/p>\n
measurements given in Ext.B1 and A1 the extent<\/p>\n
cannot be      15 cents as claimed by appellant but<\/p>\n
only     12.990 cents.    The  evidence  of  PW2  the<\/p>\n
Commissioner establishes that fact.<\/p>\n
      9.   Though learned  counsel  argued  that  the<\/p>\n
identification made by the Commissioner in Ext.C2<\/p>\n
plan is to be accepted, Ext.C1 report does not show<\/p>\n
that on what basis      the Commissioner   fixed the<\/p>\n
property.     When the property obtained under Ext.A1<\/p>\n
is the same which was originally      obtained under<\/p>\n
Ext.B1 and Ext.B1 does not show the extent of the<\/p>\n
property,      the property covered under Ext.B1 as<\/p>\n
R.S.A.93\/08                 9<\/span><\/p>\n
well as Ext.A1     cannot be fixed with reference to<\/p>\n
the extent as sought for by the learned counsel.<\/p>\n
The property can only be fixed with reference to<\/p>\n
the side measurements. It is more so         when the<\/p>\n
property covered under Ext.B2 was transferred first<\/p>\n
and    what   was  transferred under  Ext.B1  is   the<\/p>\n
property which was left behind with    the donor   and<\/p>\n
Ext.B1 does not describe the property transferred<\/p>\n
in    extent.   Therefore I cannot accept the argument<\/p>\n
of the learned counsel      that the property covered<\/p>\n
under Ext.A1 is to be fixed with reference to the<\/p>\n
extent and not the side measurements.        Moreover,<\/p>\n
when the appellant sought to fix the property based<\/p>\n
on the title deed and did not set up a case in the<\/p>\n
plaint that the side measurements shown in Ext.A1<\/p>\n
is not correct and the property is correctly shown<\/p>\n
by extent, appellant cannot be heard to contend<\/p>\n
that     property is to be fixed not with reference to<\/p>\n
the side measurements but with reference to the<\/p>\n
extent.     It is more so, when the right obtained<\/p>\n
under Ext.A1 is the right which was obtained by the<\/p>\n
R.S.A.93\/08              10<\/span><\/p>\n
donee under Ext.B1 and the property is   described<\/p>\n
in Ext.B1 only by the side measurements.       The<\/p>\n
appeal is dismissed in limine.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                              M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
\n                                      JUDGE
\ntpl\/-\n<\/p>\n
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
   ———————\n<\/p>\n
    W.P.(C).NO. \/06\n<\/p>\n
   ———————\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
    SEPTEMBER,2006<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court T.P.Mohammed Alias Babu vs Mohan John Mathew on 13 March, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RSA No. 93 of 2008() 1. T.P.MOHAMMED ALIAS BABU … Petitioner Vs 1. MOHAN JOHN MATHEW,S\/O.,Y.W.MATHEW … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.S.VINOD BHAT For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon’ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR […]<\/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-94671","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nT.P.Mohammed Alias Babu vs Mohan John Mathew on 13 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"T.P.Mohammed Alias Babu vs Mohan John Mathew on 13 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-03-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-22T22:32:47+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\\\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"T.P.Mohammed Alias Babu vs Mohan John Mathew on 13 March, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-03-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-22T22:32:47+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1568,\"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\\\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008\",\"name\":\"T.P.Mohammed Alias Babu vs Mohan John Mathew on 13 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-03-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-22T22:32:47+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"T.P.Mohammed Alias Babu vs Mohan John Mathew on 13 March, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"T.P.Mohammed Alias Babu vs Mohan John Mathew on 13 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"T.P.Mohammed Alias Babu vs Mohan John Mathew on 13 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-03-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-22T22:32:47+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\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"T.P.Mohammed Alias Babu vs Mohan John Mathew on 13 March, 2008","datePublished":"2008-03-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-22T22:32:47+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008"},"wordCount":1568,"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\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008","name":"T.P.Mohammed Alias Babu vs Mohan John Mathew on 13 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-03-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-22T22:32:47+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/t-p-mohammed-alias-babu-vs-mohan-john-mathew-on-13-march-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"T.P.Mohammed Alias Babu vs Mohan John Mathew on 13 March, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/94671","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=94671"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/94671\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=94671"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=94671"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=94671"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}