{"id":97218,"date":"2008-07-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-07-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008"},"modified":"2017-03-08T03:39:04","modified_gmt":"2017-03-07T22:09:04","slug":"m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008","title":{"rendered":"M.V.Jose vs Kamalakshi on 23 July, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
M.V.Jose vs Kamalakshi on 23 July, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWA.No. 666 of 2008()\n\n\n1. M.V.JOSE,MADATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. KAMALAKSHI,W\/O.LATE VIJAYAN,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. VINU RAJ,S\/O.LATE VIJAYAN,-DO-\n\n3. VIJAYAMMA,D\/O.LATE VIJAYAN,-DO-\n\n4. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE SPECIAL\n\n5. DISSTRICT COLLECTOR,ERNAKULAM,\n\n6. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (R.R) FORT KOCHI,\n\n7. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,NAYARAMBALAM,\n\n8. THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER,\n\n9. SUBRAMANIAN,S\/O.LATE VIJAYAN,\n\n10. K.V.JAYAN,S\/O.LATE VIJAYAN,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.P.A.ABDUL JABBAR\n\nThe Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER\n\n Dated :23\/07\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n                   H.L.Dattu, C.J. & A.K.Basheer, J.\n                   ----------------------------------------------\n                   W.A.Nos.666 of 2008 & 665 of 2008\n                   ----------------------------------------------\n                   Dated, this the 23rd day of July, 2008\n\n                                 JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
H.L.Dattu,C.J.\n<\/p>\n
              These writ appeals are directed against the order passed by<\/p>\n
the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) Nos.4306\/07 and 28273\/2007.<\/p>\n
              2. The legal representatives of one late K.K.Vijayan are<\/p>\n
before this Court in W.P.(C).No.4306 of 2007.<\/p>\n
              3. In the writ petition filed, the reliefs that are sought for by<\/p>\n
the petitioners are, firstly, to call for the records leading to<\/p>\n
Ext.P7 (revenue recovery notice) and then issue a writ in the nature of<\/p>\n
certiorari to quash those proceedings, secondly, for a direction to the 2nd<\/p>\n
respondent to accept from the petitioners the remittance of 1\/4th of the<\/p>\n
total dues towards Kist arrears on behalf of late K.K.Vijayan in pursuance<\/p>\n
of Exhibit P5 direction without any further interest and, lastly, to permit<\/p>\n
the petitioners, along with other legal heirs of late Vijayan, to sell one of<\/p>\n
the properties scheduled in Exhibit P7 notice and to pay up the dues of<\/p>\n
late Vijayan payable to the Government towards Kist amount.<\/p>\n
              4. Even according to the respondents\/State Government, the<\/p>\n
total amount that is due from late K.K.Vijayan and now the legal<\/p>\n
representatives who have come on record, is more than Rupees sixty lakhs<\/p>\n
W.A.Nos.666 & 665 of 2008\n<\/p>\n
                                          – 2 –\n<\/p>\n
\nand the same is pending from last few decades. Since the Abkari dues<\/p>\n
were not paid by late Vijayan and after his death by his legal<\/p>\n
representatives, the respondents have initiated revenue recovery<\/p>\n
proceedings. Pursuant to those proceedings, the properties of the legal<\/p>\n
representatives of late K.K.Vijayan is brought to sale. The Revenue<\/p>\n
Recovery Officer has conducted the public auction of three items of<\/p>\n
properties noticed in Exhibit P7. The properties were sold on 11.1.2007.<\/p>\n
The 6th respondent is the successful bidder. Pursuant to the conditions<\/p>\n
attached to the auction notice, the 6th respondent has deposited 15% of the<\/p>\n
bid amount on 11.1.2007 and the balance of 85% of the amount on<\/p>\n
8.2.2007.\n<\/p>\n
              5. The petitioners were fully aware of the auction sale that<\/p>\n
was conducted and the confirmation of sale that was made in favour of<\/p>\n
the 6th respondent. In spite of it, the petitioners had only questioned the<\/p>\n
revenue recovery notice (Exhibit P7) issued by the Tahsildar to recover<\/p>\n
the amounts due towards the Abkari dues. Since the petitioners had<\/p>\n
suppressed the material facts and since they did not approach this Court<\/p>\n
with clear heart, mind and hands, that itself would disentitle them in<\/p>\n
getting the extra ordinary and discretionary relief of this court. Be that as<\/p>\n
it may.\n<\/p>\n
              6. Since the properties that were sold was not confirmed by<\/p>\n
W.A.Nos.666 & 665 of 2008\n<\/p>\n
                                        – 3 –\n<\/p>\n
\nthe authorities under the Revenue Recovery Act, the 6th respondent was<\/p>\n
constrained to file W.P.(C).No.28273 of 2007.<\/p>\n
              7. The learned Single Judge has disposed of both the writ<\/p>\n
petitions. While disposing of the writ petition filed by the legal<\/p>\n
representatives of late K.K.Vijayan, the learned Single Judge has<\/p>\n
observed, that by Exhibit P5 communication, certain reliefs were granted<\/p>\n
to one of the partners of the firm and therefore, late K.K.Vijayan is also<\/p>\n
entitled to such relief. The reasoning of the learned Single Judge is that,<\/p>\n
Exhibit P5 communication ought to have been taken note of by the State<\/p>\n
Government and the same reliefs should have been also given to the legal<\/p>\n
representatives of late K.K.Vijayan and, therefore, till such time no<\/p>\n
further steps need to be taken by the authorities to confirm the sale in<\/p>\n
favour of the 6th respondent.\n<\/p>\n
              8. In order to appreciate the reasoning of the learned Single<\/p>\n
Judge, in our view, it would be appropriate to extract, in extenso, Exhibit<\/p>\n
P5 communication issued by the State Government. It is as under:<\/p>\n
                      “GOVERNMENT OF KERALA<\/p>\n
                                         Revenue (S) Department,
\n                                         Thiruvananthapuram
\n       No.57894\/s1\/01\/RD                 Dated: 29.12.2001<\/p>\n
       From
\n              The Secretary to Government.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
W.A.Nos.666 & 665 of 2008\n<\/p>\n
                                           – 4 –\n<\/p>\n
      To
\n              Shri.K.K.Vijayan,
\n              Kaithavalappil Veedu,
\n              Nayarambalam, Kochi
\n              Ernakulam.\n<\/p>\n
      Sir,
\n              Sub: RR – Kist arrears – request to accept < of the
\n                     total dues – reg.\n<\/p>\n
              Ref: 1. Your petition dt.19.1.2000 addressed to the
\n                       Secretary to Government, Revenue
\n                      Department.\n<\/p>\n
                   2. Your petition dt.1.6.2001 addressed to the
\n                      Minister (Rev).\n<\/p>\n
                                             —-\n<\/p>\n
              I am to invite your attentions to the references cited<\/p>\n
      and to inform that the District Collector, Ernakulam has<\/p>\n
      instructions to accept from you the remittance of < of the<\/p>\n
      total dues towards Kist arrears. In this connection I am<\/p>\n
      also to inform you that all the defaulters will be<\/p>\n
      individually     and     collectively    responsible    for   the<\/p>\n
      outstanding dues, provided the arrears could not be<\/p>\n
      realised in full.\n<\/p>\n
                                             Yours faithfully,<\/p>\n
                                             B.Raveendran Nair
\n                                              Under Secretary
\n                                     For Secretary to Government”.\n<\/p>\n
              9. The communication of the State Government is dated<\/p>\n
29.12.2001. In that, it is stated, that, the District Collector, Ernakulam has<\/p>\n
instructions to accept from late K.K.Vijayan the remittance of 1\/4th of the<\/p>\n
W.A.Nos.666 & 665 of 2008\n<\/p>\n
                                        – 5 –\n<\/p>\n
\ntotal dues towards Kist arrears. It is also stated that Vijayan and all the<\/p>\n
other partners of the firm, who are defaulters, are individually and<\/p>\n
collectively responsible for the outstanding dues, provided the arrears<\/p>\n
could not be realised in full.\n<\/p>\n
              10.     It is the case of Vijayan and thereafter his legal<\/p>\n
representatives that the said communication was not received by them and<\/p>\n
that document came to light only in the statement of objections filed by<\/p>\n
the respondents and, therefore, they must be given an opportunity to<\/p>\n
request    the State Government to extend the benefit of Ext.P5<\/p>\n
communication and allow them to deposit the amount stated in the<\/p>\n
communication.\n<\/p>\n
              11. Ext.P5 communication is of the year 2001. If, for any<\/p>\n
reason, the said document was available, the legal representatives of late<\/p>\n
K.K.Vijayan, who had approached this Court earlier on a number of<\/p>\n
occasions, would have produced the same and would have submitted to<\/p>\n
this Court to grant them the benefit of that communication, so that they<\/p>\n
could pay up the arrears of Abkari dues. That was not done by them at<\/p>\n
any point of time. It so happens that at every stage whenever proceedings<\/p>\n
are initiated to recover the Abkari dues, one or the other legal<\/p>\n
representatives of late K.K.Vijayan would approach this Court on one<\/p>\n
pretext or the other, and obtain an interim order and, thereby, effectively<\/p>\n
W.A.Nos.666 & 665 of 2008\n<\/p>\n
                                        – 6 –\n<\/p>\n
\npostpone the recovery of Abkari dues from late K.K.Vijayan.<\/p>\n
              12. In our view, since the communication was of the year<\/p>\n
2001, and since nothing was done by Sri.Vijayan and thereafter by his<\/p>\n
legal representatives, in our view, petitioners were disentitled for<\/p>\n
discretionary relief of this court.     Further, petitioners cannot plead<\/p>\n
non-communication of Ext.P5 communication at this belated stage. It is<\/p>\n
understandable if the respondents were initiating recovery proceedings<\/p>\n
against the petitioners alone. Sri.Vijayan was one of the partners of a firm<\/p>\n
which had conducted the abkari business.      Respondents were trying to<\/p>\n
recover the amounts due from all the partners of the firm. If any one of<\/p>\n
the partners had taken advantage of Ext.P5 communication, nothing<\/p>\n
prevented late Vijayan and thereafter his legal representatives in taking<\/p>\n
steps to comply with Ext.P5 communication. In view of all this, in our<\/p>\n
view, there was no need or necessity for the learned Single Judge to have<\/p>\n
directed the State Government to consider Ext.P5 and give relief to the<\/p>\n
petitioners.\n<\/p>\n
              13.   Even otherwise also, the Revenue Recovery Officers<\/p>\n
have initiated proceedings and they have sold the properties in auction<\/p>\n
and in the absence of a challenge to those proceedings, the learned Single<\/p>\n
Judge ought not have granted the relief sought for by the petitioners in the<\/p>\n
writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
W.A.Nos.666 & 665 of 2008\n<\/p>\n
                                          – 7 –\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
              14. It is relevant, at this stage, to state that the sale that was<\/p>\n
made in favour of the 6th respondent was questioned by one of the legal<\/p>\n
representatives of late K.K.Vijayan before the District Collector as<\/p>\n
provided under the Act and their claim is also rejected. Therefore, there<\/p>\n
is no impediment for the Revenue Recovery Officer to confirm the sale in<\/p>\n
favour of the the 6th respondent.\n<\/p>\n
              15.   In view of the above discussion, in our view, the<\/p>\n
learned Single Judge was not justified in granting the relief sought for by<\/p>\n
the petitioners in W.P.(C).No.4306 of 2007.           Accordingly, the order<\/p>\n
passed by the learned Single Judge in that writ petition requires to be set<\/p>\n
aside. Consequently, the prayer made by the petitioner in W.P.(C).<\/p>\n
No.28273 of 2007 requires to be granted.\n<\/p>\n
              16. Accordingly, we pass the following:\n<\/p>\n
                                    Order<\/p>\n
     (i)   W.A.No.666 of 2008, arising out of the orders passed by<\/p>\n
            the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C).No.4306 of 2007, is<\/p>\n
            allowed. The orders passed by the learned Single Judge<\/p>\n
            is set aside.\n<\/p>\n
     (ii) W.A.No.665 of 2008, arising out of the orders passed by<\/p>\n
            the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C).No.28273 of 2007,<\/p>\n
            is allowed and the impugned order is set aside.<\/p>\n
W.A.Nos.666 & 665 of 2008\n<\/p>\n
                                       – 8 –\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
    (iii) Now, a direction is issued to Special Tahsildar (R.R.),<\/p>\n
          Fort Kochi, to execute the sale deed in favour of the<\/p>\n
          appellant – M.V.Jose, S\/o.Varghese – as expeditiously as<\/p>\n
          possible, at any rate, in one month’s time from the date<\/p>\n
          of receipt of a copy of this court’s order.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
     (iv) In view of the orders passed in the Writ Appeals, all<\/p>\n
          pending interlocutory applications are closed.<\/p>\n
           Ordered accordingly.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n                                                  H.L.Dattu\n                                                Chief Justice\n\n\n\n                                                A.K.Basheer\nvku\/dk                                              Judge\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court M.V.Jose vs Kamalakshi on 23 July, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WA.No. 666 of 2008() 1. M.V.JOSE,MADATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, … Petitioner Vs 1. KAMALAKSHI,W\/O.LATE VIJAYAN, … Respondent 2. VINU RAJ,S\/O.LATE VIJAYAN,-DO- 3. VIJAYAMMA,D\/O.LATE VIJAYAN,-DO- 4. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE SPECIAL 5. DISSTRICT COLLECTOR,ERNAKULAM, 6. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (R.R) FORT […]<\/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-97218","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nM.V.Jose vs Kamalakshi on 23 July, 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\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M.V.Jose vs Kamalakshi on 23 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-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=\"2008-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-03-07T22:09:04+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M.V.Jose vs Kamalakshi on 23 July, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-07T22:09:04+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1571,\"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\\\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008\",\"name\":\"M.V.Jose vs Kamalakshi on 23 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-07T22:09:04+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M.V.Jose vs Kamalakshi on 23 July, 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":"M.V.Jose vs Kamalakshi on 23 July, 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\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M.V.Jose vs Kamalakshi on 23 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-03-07T22:09:04+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M.V.Jose vs Kamalakshi on 23 July, 2008","datePublished":"2008-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-07T22:09:04+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008"},"wordCount":1571,"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\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008","name":"M.V.Jose vs Kamalakshi on 23 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-07T22:09:04+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/m-v-jose-vs-kamalakshi-on-23-july-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M.V.Jose vs Kamalakshi on 23 July, 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\/97218","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=97218"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97218\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=97218"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=97218"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=97218"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}