{"id":110319,"date":"2008-01-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-01-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008"},"modified":"2017-08-31T16:40:28","modified_gmt":"2017-08-31T11:10:28","slug":"moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008","title":{"rendered":"Moideenkutty vs Veeran on 29 January, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Moideenkutty vs Veeran on 29 January, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCRP No. 2617 of 2001()\n\n\n\n1. MOIDEENKUTTY\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. VEERAN\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN\n\n Dated :29\/01\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n                                                     K.T. SANKARAN, J.\n\n                           ...................................................................................\n\n                                               C.R.P. No.  2617  OF  2001\n\n                           ...................................................................................\n\n                                         Dated this the 29th January, 2008\n\n\n\n\n                                                            O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n<p>           The revision petitioner filed O.S.No. 342 of   1993 on the file of the court of the<\/p>\n<p>Munsiff,    Ottappalam against the respondents for a declaration that the decree in O.S.\n<\/p>\n<p>No. 56 of 1985 on the file of the Sub Court, Ottappalam is not binding  on the plaintiff or<\/p>\n<p>plaint schedule property.   There was also a prayer for consequential injunction.   When<\/p>\n<p>the suit was listed for trial on 18.08.1998, the revision petitioner failed to appear.   The<\/p>\n<p>suit was dismissed for default.  I.A.No. 1769 of 1998  was filed by the revision petitioner<\/p>\n<p>under Rule 9 Order IX of the Code of Civil Procedure.  That application was posted on<\/p>\n<p>14.12.1998.   On the ground that the petitioner was not ready and that he was absent,<\/p>\n<p>I.A.No.   1769   of     1998   was   dismissed   by   the   order   dated   14.12.1998.     The   revision<\/p>\n<p>petitioner filed C.M.A.No. 2 of 1999 before the Sub Court,  Ottappalam challenging the<\/p>\n<p>order of the trial court.  The appellate court dismissed the appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>           2.  The appellate court considered the  question as to whether the petitioner was<\/p>\n<p>prevented by sufficient cause  from appearing  in the court on 18.08.1998 and held that<\/p>\n<p>the case put forward  by the petitioner does not  appear to be  true .\n<\/p>\n<p>           3.  The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the courts below<\/p>\n<p>should have granted an opportunity to the petitioner to prosecute the suit on the merits.\n<\/p>\n<p>The learned counsel for the 4th respondent submitted that there is no scope for allowing<\/p>\n<p>the petitioner to prosecute the suit or to prosecute the application for restoration of the<\/p>\n<p>suit in view of   subsequent developments.   He submitted that the   4th  respondent filed<\/p>\n<p>O.S.No.  58 of 2000 on the file of the court of the Munsiff, Ottappalam  for a permanent<\/p>\n<p>C.R.P. No.  2617  OF  2001<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                        2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>prohibitory   injunction   against   the   plaintiff   and   defendant   Nos.   1   to   3.     The   first<\/p>\n<p>respondent herein, viz., Veeran had filed O.S.No. 89 of 2000 before the Munsiff&#8217;s Court,<\/p>\n<p>Ottappalam for a declaration   that the decree in O.S.No. 56 of 1985   on the file of the<\/p>\n<p>Sub Court, Ottappalam is not binding on him.  It is submitted that  O.S.Nos. 58 of 2000<\/p>\n<p>and   89   of   2000   were   tried   together   and   were   disposed   of     by   a   common   judgment.\n<\/p>\n<p>dated  19.07.2004, by which the suit filed  by the  4th  respondent    was decreed  and  the<\/p>\n<p>suit   filed   by   the   first   respondent   was   dismissed.     It   is   also   submitted   by   the   learned<\/p>\n<p>counsel for the 4th  respondent that the revision petitioner was a party in O.S.No. 58 of<\/p>\n<p>2000 and 89 of 2000.   The learned counsel for the 4th  respondent also submitted  that<\/p>\n<p>the revision petitioner   had filed O.S.No. 132 of 1993 on the file of the Munsiff&#8217;s Court,<\/p>\n<p>Ottappalam for partition of the present plaint schedule property.   O.S.No. 132 of 1993<\/p>\n<p>was dismissed  for  default    on  18.08.1998  and  that   decision has  become  final.         The<\/p>\n<p>learned   counsel   for   the   4th  respondent   submitted   that   in   the   light   of   subsequent<\/p>\n<p>developments   no useful purpose would be served   by  restoration of the present suit,<\/p>\n<p>viz.  O.S.No.  342   of   1993.    The  learned  counsel  also   pointed  out   that   O.S.No.   342  of<\/p>\n<p>1993   was   filed     before   the   Munsiff&#8217;s   Court,   while   the   decree   in   respect   of   which   the<\/p>\n<p>declaration was sought,  was passed  by the Sub Court and therefore, the suit is hit by<\/p>\n<p>Section 41(b) of the Specific Relief Act .\n<\/p>\n<p>         4.  It is not necessary  to decide the aforesaid contentions in this revision.  I am<\/p>\n<p>of the view that an   opportunity could be granted to the petitioner to prosecute I.A.No.\n<\/p>\n<p>1769 of 1998.  Granting of such an opportunity is not unconditional.  The petitioner has<\/p>\n<p>to pay a sum   of Rs. 1500\/- (Rupees one thousand and five hundred only) as cost   to<\/p>\n<p>the 4th  respondent within a period of one month from today.   If he fails to pay the cost,<\/p>\n<p>the Civil Revision Petition will stand dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>C.R.P. No.  2617  OF  2001<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                              3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>       For the aforesaid reasons, the  order dated 14th December,  1998 passed by the<\/p>\n<p>trial court and the judgment dated 22nd  May, 2001 passed by the lower appellate court<\/p>\n<p>are set aside.     I.A.No. 1769 of 1998 is restored to file on condition that the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>shall pay a sum of Rs. 1500\/- as cost to the 4th respondent within a period of one month<\/p>\n<p>from today.  On payment of the cost, the trial court shall dispose of I.A.No. 1769 of 1998<\/p>\n<p>on the merits.  It is made clear that the 4th respondent would be entitled to raise all the<\/p>\n<p>contentions,  which are referred to above,  before the trial court.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                                          K.T. SANKARAN,<\/p>\n<p>                                                                                     JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n<p>lk<\/p>\n<p>C.R.P. No.  2617  OF  2001<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>                                                     K.T. SANKARAN, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                         &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                 C.R.P. No. 2617 OF 2001<\/p>\n<p>                                          &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;\n<\/p>\n<p>                                            Dated this the  29th January, 2008<\/p>\n<p>                                                             O R D E R<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Moideenkutty vs Veeran on 29 January, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM CRP No. 2617 of 2001() 1. MOIDEENKUTTY &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. VEERAN &#8230; Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH For Respondent :SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH The Hon&#8217;ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN Dated :29\/01\/2008 O R D E R K.T. SANKARAN, J. &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. [&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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-110319","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Moideenkutty vs Veeran on 29 January, 2008 - 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\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Moideenkutty vs Veeran on 29 January, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-01-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-08-31T11:10:28+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=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Moideenkutty vs Veeran on 29 January, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-01-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-31T11:10:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008\"},\"wordCount\":774,\"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\\\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008\",\"name\":\"Moideenkutty vs Veeran on 29 January, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-01-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-31T11:10:28+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Moideenkutty vs Veeran on 29 January, 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":"Moideenkutty vs Veeran on 29 January, 2008 - 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\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Moideenkutty vs Veeran on 29 January, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-01-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-08-31T11:10:28+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Moideenkutty vs Veeran on 29 January, 2008","datePublished":"2008-01-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-31T11:10:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008"},"wordCount":774,"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\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008","name":"Moideenkutty vs Veeran on 29 January, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-01-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-31T11:10:28+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/moideenkutty-vs-veeran-on-29-january-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Moideenkutty vs Veeran on 29 January, 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\/110319","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=110319"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/110319\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=110319"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=110319"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=110319"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}