{"id":116083,"date":"2009-02-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-02-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009"},"modified":"2018-02-27T01:00:25","modified_gmt":"2018-02-26T19:30:25","slug":"dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009","title":{"rendered":"Dhabai Marandi vs Bibhuti Marandi @ Lodo Marandi on 25 February, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Dhabai Marandi vs Bibhuti Marandi @ Lodo Marandi on 25 February, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI\n                    S.A. No. 487 of 2003\n\n          Dhabai Marandi                    ........Appellant\n                                Versus\n          Bibhuti Marandi @ Lodo Marandi &amp; Others ...Respondents\n\n          Coram      :THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. MERATHIA\n                                       ----------\n          For the Appellants   : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Advocate\n                               -------\n          C.A.V. On 17.2.2009                     Delivered on 25\/2\/2009\n\n8\/25.2.2009<\/pre>\n<p>           Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that<br \/>\n          there is no custom of adoption in Santhals ( a Scheduled Tribe) and<br \/>\n          Hindu Law of Succession is not applicable to them. He relied on the<br \/>\n          judgment reported in AIR 1996 SC 1864-Madhu Kishwar etc. The<br \/>\n          concurrent findings of fact against the appellant, inter alia, is that<br \/>\n          adoption is prevalent in Santhals of the instant case and they are<br \/>\n          Hinduised Santhals.\n<\/p>\n<p>          2.          After taking into consideration Madhu Kishwar ( supra) and<br \/>\n          the judgment reported in (2000) 8 SCC 587-Labishwar Manjhi etc.<br \/>\n          Learned Single Judge of this Court, in the case of Ram Nath Munda etc.<br \/>\n          2004 (3) JCR 561 ( Jhr) inter alia held as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>                      &#8220;12.      The learned counsel for the appellant<br \/>\n                      has argued relying on a decision reported in AIR<br \/>\n                      1996 SC 1864 (a judgment given by three Judges<br \/>\n                      Bench) where it has been held by a majority view<br \/>\n                      that neither Hindu Succession Act, nor Succession<br \/>\n                      Act nor even Shariat Law is applicable to people<br \/>\n                      governed by tribal and the plaintiff-respondents<br \/>\n                      are tribal. To the contrary the learned counsel<br \/>\n                      for   the   respondent   relying  on   2001   (2)<br \/>\n                      ( Supreme) 568 and also on the minority view of<br \/>\n                      the above decisions (supra) has argued that if<br \/>\n                      the parties have sufficiently been Hinduised then<br \/>\n                      in that circumstances they were to be governed by<br \/>\n                      Hindu Succession Act. The argument was raised on<br \/>\n                      behalf of the appellant that the decision given<br \/>\n                      in 2001 ( Supreme) is a two Judges Bench decision<br \/>\n                      whereas that of the 1996 is three Judges Bench<br \/>\n                      decision and its majority view is binding. In the<br \/>\n                      background of the aforesaid contention I have<br \/>\n                      carefully gone through both the cases. In 1996<br \/>\n                      case a petition has been filed by certain<br \/>\n                      voluntary organizations that the tribal women in<br \/>\n                      the State of Bihar were being discriminated<br \/>\n                      against male as they had no right to succeed the<br \/>\n                      property though the tribals male has got such<br \/>\n                      right and this was in violation of Article 14 of<br \/>\n                      the Constitution of India and certain provision<br \/>\n                      of C.N.T. Act were sought to be quashed. In that<br \/>\n                      case some women were tribals and some were<br \/>\n                      christen tribes. No where it was pleaded that any<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                              2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>                      of the women had been sufficiently Hinduised and<br \/>\n                      therefore that decision is to be understood only<br \/>\n                      in the background of the fact that the ladies<br \/>\n                      whose case were being espoused were tribals pure<br \/>\n                      and simple, or Christan Tribal. Therefore, as the<br \/>\n                      provision of the Hindu Succession Act bars<br \/>\n                      application of the Act to tribal thus aforesaid<br \/>\n                      decision was given. Thus in that case this aspect<br \/>\n                      that what should happen to those tribal who have<br \/>\n                      been sufficiently Hinduised was not at all<br \/>\n                      considered whereas in 2001 cases this was a<br \/>\n                      matter in issue.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                      13.       Section 2 of the Act defines Hindu<br \/>\n                      which is as follows:-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                      2(1)(a)   to any person who is a Hindu by<br \/>\n                      religion in any of its forms or developments,<br \/>\n                      including a Virashaiva, a Lingayat or a follower<br \/>\n                      of the Brahmo, Prarthana or Arya Samaj.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<pre>\n                      (b)       to any person who is a Buddhist, Jaina\n                      or Sikh by religion, and\n                      (c)       to any other person, who is not a\n<\/pre>\n<blockquote><p>                      Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew by religion,<br \/>\n                      unless it is proved that any such person would<br \/>\n                      not have been governed by this Hindu Law or by<br \/>\n                      any custom or usage as part of that law in<br \/>\n                      respect of any of the matters dealt with herein<br \/>\n                      if this Act had not been passed.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                                Clause ( c) finds a negative definition<br \/>\n                      of Hindu by excluding Muslims, Christian, Parsi<br \/>\n                      or Jews, meaning thereby that if they are not<br \/>\n                      Christian, Muslims, Jews they are Hindu provided<br \/>\n                      they could not have been governed by Hindu Law or<br \/>\n                      its custom. Section 2(1) of the aforesaid clause<br \/>\n                      do not exclude the scheduled tribes from the<br \/>\n                      definition of Hindu. Section 2(2) only postpones<br \/>\n                      the application of Hindu Succession Act till the<br \/>\n                      notification as required under this provision is<br \/>\n                      issued. This by implication means that S.T. are<br \/>\n                      also Hindues only, the application of Hindu<br \/>\n                      Succession Act is simply contingent to certain<br \/>\n                      notification. A scheduled tribe, pure and simple<br \/>\n                      who is adhering to his custom is to be<br \/>\n                      distinguished from that who has been Hinduised<br \/>\n                      prior to commencement of the Hindu Succession Act<br \/>\n                      and in my view such Hinduised tribal do fall<br \/>\n                      within Section 2(1) ( c) of the Act and may be<br \/>\n                      treated as Hindu because there is no proving on<br \/>\n                      the record that such tribals could not have been<br \/>\n                      governed by the Hindu Law. Nothing has been shown<br \/>\n                      that the custom bars the Munda from adopting any<br \/>\n                      form of Hindu Religion&#8221;.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>          3.          In my opinion, no substantial question of law is involved in<br \/>\n          this appeal, which is required to be decided. Accordingly, this Second<br \/>\n          Appeal is dismissed. However, no costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                    ( R.K. Merathia, J)<br \/>\nRakesh\/\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jharkhand High Court Dhabai Marandi vs Bibhuti Marandi @ Lodo Marandi on 25 February, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI S.A. No. 487 of 2003 Dhabai Marandi &#8230;&#8230;..Appellant Versus Bibhuti Marandi @ Lodo Marandi &amp; Others &#8230;Respondents Coram :THE HON&#8217;BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. MERATHIA &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;- For the Appellants : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, [&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":[8,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-116083","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jharkhand-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Dhabai Marandi vs Bibhuti Marandi @ Lodo Marandi on 25 February, 2009 - 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\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dhabai Marandi vs Bibhuti Marandi @ Lodo Marandi on 25 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-02-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-02-26T19:30:25+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\\\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Dhabai Marandi vs Bibhuti Marandi @ Lodo Marandi on 25 February, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-26T19:30:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009\"},\"wordCount\":771,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jharkhand High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009\",\"name\":\"Dhabai Marandi vs Bibhuti Marandi @ Lodo Marandi on 25 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-26T19:30:25+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dhabai Marandi vs Bibhuti Marandi @ Lodo Marandi on 25 February, 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":"Dhabai Marandi vs Bibhuti Marandi @ Lodo Marandi on 25 February, 2009 - 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\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dhabai Marandi vs Bibhuti Marandi @ Lodo Marandi on 25 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-02-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-02-26T19:30:25+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\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Dhabai Marandi vs Bibhuti Marandi @ Lodo Marandi on 25 February, 2009","datePublished":"2009-02-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-26T19:30:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009"},"wordCount":771,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jharkhand High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009","name":"Dhabai Marandi vs Bibhuti Marandi @ Lodo Marandi on 25 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-02-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-26T19:30:25+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhabai-marandi-vs-bibhuti-marandi-lodo-marandi-on-25-february-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dhabai Marandi vs Bibhuti Marandi @ Lodo Marandi on 25 February, 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\/116083","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=116083"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/116083\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=116083"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=116083"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=116083"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}