{"id":113059,"date":"2009-07-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-07-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009"},"modified":"2016-01-09T20:08:22","modified_gmt":"2016-01-09T14:38:22","slug":"parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009","title":{"rendered":"Parties Name vs Smt. Sarita Devi And Others on 3 July, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Parties Name vs Smt. Sarita Devi And Others on 3 July, 2009<\/div>\n
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9546 OF 2009                           -1-\n\n\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT\nCHANDIGARH.\n\n\n\n            DATE OF DECISION: July 03, 2009.\n\n                  Parties Name\nNew India Assurance Company Limited\n                                 ...PETITIONER\n      VERSUS\nSmt. Sarita Devi and others\n                                 ...RESPONDENTS\n\n\nCORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH\n\n\nPRESENT: Mr. Ashwani Talwar,\n         Advocate, for the petitioner.\n\n\nJASBIR SINGH, J. (oral)\n\n\nORDER:\n<\/pre>\n
            This order will dispose of seven civil writ petitions bearing No.<\/p>\n
9546 to 9550, 9587 and 9588, all of the year 2009, as common question of<\/p>\n
law and facts is involved in all these cases. For facility of dictating order,<\/p>\n
facts are being taken from CWP No. 9546 of 2009.\n<\/p>\n
            This writ petition has been filed by New India Assurance<\/p>\n
Company Ltd. against award dated May 11, 2009 (Annexure P-1), passed by<\/p>\n
the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Gurgaon,( in short Lok<\/p>\n
Adalat) awarding compensation of Rs. 1,00,000\/- to the claimants under<\/p>\n
“Devi Rakshak Yojna Insurance Scheme” (in short the Scheme) on account<\/p>\n
of death of Shri Subhash Chand, husband of respondent No. 1, in a motor<\/p>\n
accident, on October 28, 2004.\n<\/p>\n
            Counsel for the petitioner heard.\n<\/p>\n
 CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9546 OF 2009                           -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
            It is apparent from the records that the Haryana Government<\/p>\n
launched a Scheme, which envisages payment of compensation to all<\/p>\n
bread earners of all the families in the State of Haryana, in case a bread<\/p>\n
earner suffers death or permanent total disability due to rail, road or air<\/p>\n
accident and riots, strike etc.    Detail of the circumstances, in which<\/p>\n
compensation will be payable, has been given in para No. 2 of the<\/p>\n
Memorandum of Understanding entered between Government of Haryana<\/p>\n
and the petitioner (Annexure P-3). In the Scheme it is provided that the<\/p>\n
petitioner Insurance Company shall disburse amount of compensation to the<\/p>\n
family of the deceased within 72 hours after the death.<\/p>\n
             Subhash Chand, husband of respondent No. 1, died in a road<\/p>\n
accident on October 28, 2004. He was 43 years of age. FIR No. 263 was<\/p>\n
recorded on October 28, 2004, in Police Station Bilaspur, district Gurgaon,<\/p>\n
regarding above said accident. Despite intimation, when compensation was<\/p>\n
not paid, private respondents approached the Lok Adalat for claiming<\/p>\n
requisite relief. Upon notice, petitioner put in appearance and took up a plea<\/p>\n
that only a head of the family, as on the date of issue of the policy, was<\/p>\n
covered under the Scheme. It was further objected that as the deceased was<\/p>\n
not head of the family, so compensation was not payable to his dependents.<\/p>\n
Above said argument has again been reiterated before this Court today at the<\/p>\n
time of arguments. This Court feels that the argument is not tenable and<\/p>\n
deserves rejection. The Lok Adalat, while rejecting objection, raised by the<\/p>\n
Insurance Company, has observed as under:\n<\/p>\n
            “The repudiation of the claim has been made on the sole ground<\/p>\n
            that the deceased was not the head of the family and so the<\/p>\n
            claim was not maintainable.       The respondent has taken an
\n CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9546 OF 2009                    -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
        erroneous view. The name of the deceased appeared in the old<\/p>\n
        Ration Card of the family but it was lost. In the new Ration<\/p>\n
        card got prepared after his death the name of his wife Sarita<\/p>\n
        Devi with children Mukesh and Aarti appeared. There was a<\/p>\n
        separate Ration card in the name of Sukhdev and Emarti the<\/p>\n
        parents of the deceased. This shows he was separate from his<\/p>\n
        parents and as such was head of the family. It is not correct<\/p>\n
        that only the head of the family was covered under the policy.<\/p>\n
        The Ld. Counsel for the respondent argued that in Ruby’s case<\/p>\n
        that view was taken by Insurance Ombudsman. He further<\/p>\n
        argued that in a clarifying meeting held on 21.10.04 between<\/p>\n
        the Sr. Divisional Manager of the Insurance Company and the<\/p>\n
        concerned officers of Haryana Govt., it was mutually agreed to<\/p>\n
        compensate the death of the head of the family only. The<\/p>\n
        minutes of that meeting have not been shown. Even if there was<\/p>\n
        any such meeting and something was agreed it was not given<\/p>\n
        any effect. The MOU was signed on 25.10.04 i.e. After four<\/p>\n
        days of the said meeting and no such agreement finds any<\/p>\n
        mention in the MOU. The word head of family finds no<\/p>\n
        mention in the MOU. The relevant clause of the MOU reads as<\/p>\n
        follows:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
        Definitions<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
        1.Insured beneficiary: it has been decided to continue the<\/p>\n
        scheme to all the bread earners of all the families in Haryana<\/p>\n
        whose names appear in the voter list of Haryana or Ration Card<\/p>\n
        issued by concerned department of Haryana except Govt.
\n CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9546 OF 2009                              -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
            employees and Income Tax payees. In order to clarify the<\/p>\n
            situation.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            It is further stated that if there are more than one bread earners<\/p>\n
            in a family, in that case only one bread earner will be covered<\/p>\n
            under the scheme. Accident resulting in death\/ permanent<\/p>\n
            disability met to the insured beneficiaries even outside Haryana<\/p>\n
            is also covered under the scheme.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            So the word ‘head of the family’ finds no mention in the MOU<\/p>\n
            and it has been clearly mentioned therein that when if there are<\/p>\n
            more than one bread earners in a family, only one bread earner<\/p>\n
            will be covered under the scheme. The question of limitation<\/p>\n
            was also raised but one of the applicants is still minor and so no<\/p>\n
            question of limitation arises. In III (2003) ACC 25, Smt. Abha<\/p>\n
            Yadav Vs. Municipal Corporation Delhi which was a suit<\/p>\n
            claiming damages\/ compensation under Section 1A of the Fatal<\/p>\n
            Accident Act, 1855, it was held that though the suit was filed<\/p>\n
            after the statutory period of two years, it will still in time as the<\/p>\n
            time stood extended by legal fiction on account of disability\/<\/p>\n
            minority of three plaintiffs. The suit was filed by widow and<\/p>\n
            three minor sons and the aged father of the deceased with<\/p>\n
            mother of the minors as guardian. Thus the applicants are<\/p>\n
            entitled to the benefit of the policy.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            This Court is of the opinion that the finding given above is<\/p>\n
perfectly justified. In MOU, as has been noted above, there is no provision<\/p>\n
stating that compensation shall be payable only on account of death of head
\n CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9546 OF 2009                           -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
of the family. Rather it is mentioned that the benefit under the Scheme shall<\/p>\n
be available to all the bread earners of all the families in the State of<\/p>\n
Haryana, whose name appear in the voters’ list of the State or in ration card<\/p>\n
issued by the concerned Department of the State of Haryana except<\/p>\n
Government employees and Income-tax payees. The Lok Adalat has noted<\/p>\n
that old ration card of the family was lost.     New ration card was got<\/p>\n
prepared after death of Subhash Chand. In view of that, name of the<\/p>\n
deceased did not appear in the ration card. It was also noticed by the Lok<\/p>\n
Adalat that parents of the deceased were living separate and had a separate<\/p>\n
ration card. Admittedly, the deceased was neither a Government employee<\/p>\n
nor Income-tax assessee. This Court is of the view that the respondents were<\/p>\n
entitled to get compensation under the scheme, which has rightly been<\/p>\n
granted to them by the Lok Adalat. Exactly, a similar controversy came up<\/p>\n
before this Court in C.W.P. No. 13979 of 2007 (New India Assurance<\/p>\n
Company Ltd. v. Raj Bala and<\/a> another), decided on April 4, 2008, and a<\/p>\n
Division Bench of this Court held that once name of the deceased appeared<\/p>\n
in the ration card, then the dependent family member shall be entitled to get<\/p>\n
compensation.\n<\/p>\n
            No other point was argued. Consequently, the writ petitions<\/p>\n
fail and the same are dismissed.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n\nJuly 03, 2009.                                          ( Jasbir Singh )\nDKC                                                          Judge\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Parties Name vs Smt. Sarita Devi And Others on 3 July, 2009 CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9546 OF 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: July 03, 2009. Parties Name New India Assurance Company Limited …PETITIONER VERSUS Smt. Sarita Devi and others …RESPONDENTS CORAM: […]<\/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":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-113059","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nParties Name vs Smt. Sarita Devi And Others on 3 July, 2009 - 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\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Parties Name vs Smt. Sarita Devi And Others on 3 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-07-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-01-09T14:38:22+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Parties Name vs Smt. Sarita Devi And Others on 3 July, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-09T14:38:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1219,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009\",\"name\":\"Parties Name vs Smt. Sarita Devi And Others on 3 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-09T14:38:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Parties Name vs Smt. Sarita Devi And Others on 3 July, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Parties Name vs Smt. Sarita Devi And Others on 3 July, 2009 - 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\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Parties Name vs Smt. Sarita Devi And Others on 3 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-07-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-01-09T14:38:22+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Parties Name vs Smt. Sarita Devi And Others on 3 July, 2009","datePublished":"2009-07-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-09T14:38:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009"},"wordCount":1219,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009","name":"Parties Name vs Smt. Sarita Devi And Others on 3 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-07-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-09T14:38:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/parties-name-vs-smt-sarita-devi-and-others-on-3-july-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Parties Name vs Smt. Sarita Devi And Others on 3 July, 2009"}]},{"@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\/113059","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=113059"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/113059\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=113059"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=113059"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=113059"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}