{"id":112514,"date":"2010-12-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-11-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010"},"modified":"2018-09-10T16:51:45","modified_gmt":"2018-09-10T11:21:45","slug":"santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010","title":{"rendered":"Santharam Shenoy P. vs The R.D.O. on 1 December, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Santharam Shenoy P. vs The R.D.O. on 1 December, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 1482 of 2010(I)\n\n\n1. SANTHARAM SHENOY P., S\/O.N..SHENOY,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. S.SREEKALA, W\/O.SANTHARAM SHENOY P.,\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE R.D.O., FORT KOCHI, KOCHI.\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. TAHSILDAR, KOCHI TALUK, FORT KOCHI.\n\n3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM,\n\n4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY IT'S\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.G.KRISHNAKUMAR\n\n                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON\n\n Dated :01\/12\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                   P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.\n                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n                       W.P (C) No. 1482 OF 2010\n                      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n              Dated, this the 01st day of December, 2010\n\n                               JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
      The petitioners, who are husband and wife, are aggrieved of the<\/p>\n
assessment finalized by the concerned authorities under the relevant<\/p>\n
provisions of the Kerala Building Tax Act, particularly with regard to the<\/p>\n
assessment under Section 5 imposing the building tax and also the<\/p>\n
consequential proceedings under Section 5 A.\n<\/p>\n
      2.   The specific case of the petitioners is that, the buildings<\/p>\n
concerned are two separate structures situated in two different premises<\/p>\n
owned by the husband and wife separately, which ought not to have been<\/p>\n
reckoned as ‘single unit’ for the propose of assessment under any<\/p>\n
circumstances. It is stated that the husband purchased the property as per<\/p>\n
the settlement deed No. 2407\/03, wherein no building was there at the time<\/p>\n
of purchase and the husband constructed the building in the year 2004. In<\/p>\n
the case of the other property owned by the wife of the first petitioner i.e.<\/p>\n
second petitioner, it was obtained as per the title deed bearing No 5139 of<\/p>\n
2004, wherein a building was already in existence bearing door No. CC<\/p>\n
8\/601 and this building was there right from 1973 onwards. With regard to<\/p>\n
the construction of the first petitioner’s building, the same has been<\/p>\n
effected on the basis of Ext. P1 plan obtained in the name of the first<\/p>\n
W.P. (C) No. 1482 of 2010
\n                                      2<\/span><\/p>\n
petitioner himself and Ext. P2 occupancy certificate has been issued clearly<\/p>\n
pointing out that it is having only an extent of 182.52 sq.m.         The said<\/p>\n
building has been constructed by the first petitioner in such a manner that<\/p>\n
it is placed so close to the existing building in the name of the second<\/p>\n
petitioner\/wife in the property covered by document No. 5139 of 2004,<\/p>\n
which does not tilt the balance in any manner so as to classify the two<\/p>\n
buildings as a ‘single unit’.   It is contended that, since the buildings are<\/p>\n
owned by the petitioners separately, in the two different properties owned,<\/p>\n
possessed and enjoyed by them, they cannot be treated and assessed as<\/p>\n
a ‘single unit’ and that the assessment has to be finalized treating them<\/p>\n
separately.   In spite of the factual position as above, the assessment<\/p>\n
authority finalized the assessment, imposing a huge liability, treating the<\/p>\n
two buildings as ‘single unit’, against which statutory appeal was preferred<\/p>\n
by the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
       3. In the course of the proceedings pending before the appellate<\/p>\n
authority, the petitioner produced all the relevant documents to substantiate<\/p>\n
the contentions.     However without any proper regard to the facts and<\/p>\n
figures, the appellate authority declined interference, which made the<\/p>\n
petitioner to approach this Court by filing the present Writ Petition.<\/p>\n
       4. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well, who submits,<\/p>\n
with reference to the materials on record, that, in the course of the<\/p>\n
W.P. (C) No. 1482 of 2010
\n                                      3<\/span><\/p>\n
proceedings, the nature of the building was actually got verified by the<\/p>\n
concerned Tahasildar, who        conducted a spot inspection, when it was<\/p>\n
revealed that the building was a ‘single unit’ and that the plan for<\/p>\n
constructing the building was in the name of the first petitioner. However,<\/p>\n
the specific averments raised from the part of the petitioner that the<\/p>\n
buildings were having two separate door numbers, two separate access<\/p>\n
and such other vital particulars have not been chosen to be rebutted, but<\/p>\n
for the observations made in Ext. P10 that the building has been<\/p>\n
constructed as a ‘single unit’. Even going by Ext. P10, it is seen that some<\/p>\n
confusion was there with regard to the nature of the building, in so far as<\/p>\n
the appellate authority\/first respondent has referred to the building as a<\/p>\n
“flat”, when nobody has a case that the petitioners constructed any flat in<\/p>\n
the property concerned.       The learned Government Pleader also submits<\/p>\n
that if the petitioners are actually aggrieved of the verdict passed by the<\/p>\n
first respondent, there is a further remedy by way of revision as<\/p>\n
contemplated under Section 13 of the Act, by approaching the District<\/p>\n
Collector.\n<\/p>\n
        5. Considering the fact that there is a serious dispute with regard to<\/p>\n
the factual particulars and more so in view of the wrong reference made by<\/p>\n
the first appellate authority to the building as a ‘flat’ in Ext. P10, this Court<\/p>\n
finds it necessary to have the matter considered by the statutory authority.<\/p>\n
W.P. (C) No. 1482 of 2010
\n                                       4<\/span><\/p>\n
Since the matter was admitted by this Court on 15.01.2010, also granting<\/p>\n
interim order of ‘status quo’, this Court finds that, the petitioner can be<\/p>\n
relegated to file a revision petition under Section 13 and if any such<\/p>\n
revision petition is filed within ‘one month’ from the date of receipt of a copy<\/p>\n
of the judgment, the same shall considered as valid and proper revision<\/p>\n
petition and it shall be dealt with and decided on merits, after causing a re-<\/p>\n
inspection\/verification of the nature of the building by the revisional<\/p>\n
authority i.e. 3rd respondent. The petitioners shall produce all the relevant<\/p>\n
documents in support of the contentions before the revision authority; on<\/p>\n
which event, the same shall be considered and the matter shall be finalized<\/p>\n
as above, within a period of three months.\n<\/p>\n
        Taking note of the fact that, the petitioner has satisfied a sum of `<\/p>\n
8,000\/-, pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court on 15.01.10, the<\/p>\n
third respondent shall consider whether any further amount is liable to be<\/p>\n
paid, to top up the figure, for meeting the statutory deposit of 50 % of the<\/p>\n
disputed liability, to entertain the revision petition as provided under the Act<\/p>\n
and if any deficit is there, the petitioner shall be given an opportunity to<\/p>\n
have it rectified\/satisfied accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
       The Writ Petition is disposed of.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                     P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE
\nkmd<\/p>\n
W.P. (C) No. 1482 of 2010
\n                             5<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Santharam Shenoy P. vs The R.D.O. on 1 December, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 1482 of 2010(I) 1. SANTHARAM SHENOY P., S\/O.N..SHENOY, … Petitioner 2. S.SREEKALA, W\/O.SANTHARAM SHENOY P., Vs 1. THE R.D.O., FORT KOCHI, KOCHI. … Respondent 2. TAHSILDAR, KOCHI TALUK, FORT KOCHI. 3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, […]<\/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-112514","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSantharam Shenoy P. vs The R.D.O. on 1 December, 2010 - 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\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Santharam Shenoy P. vs The R.D.O. on 1 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-09-10T11:21:45+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Santharam Shenoy P. vs The R.D.O. on 1 December, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-10T11:21:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010\"},\"wordCount\":957,\"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\\\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010\",\"name\":\"Santharam Shenoy P. vs The R.D.O. on 1 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-10T11:21:45+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Santharam Shenoy P. vs The R.D.O. on 1 December, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Santharam Shenoy P. vs The R.D.O. on 1 December, 2010 - 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\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Santharam Shenoy P. vs The R.D.O. on 1 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-09-10T11:21:45+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Santharam Shenoy P. vs The R.D.O. on 1 December, 2010","datePublished":"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-10T11:21:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010"},"wordCount":957,"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\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010","name":"Santharam Shenoy P. vs The R.D.O. on 1 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-10T11:21:45+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/santharam-shenoy-p-vs-the-r-d-o-on-1-december-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Santharam Shenoy P. vs The R.D.O. on 1 December, 2010"}]},{"@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\/112514","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=112514"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/112514\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=112514"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=112514"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=112514"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}