{"id":121347,"date":"2011-07-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-07-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011"},"modified":"2016-05-13T08:46:03","modified_gmt":"2016-05-13T03:16:03","slug":"the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011","title":{"rendered":"The vs The on 11 July, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">The vs The on 11 July, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Ks Jhaveri,<\/div>\n<pre>  \n Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n    \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nFA\/1492\/2007\t 6\/ 6\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nFIRST\nAPPEAL No. 1492 of 2007\n \n\nWith\n \n\nFIRST\nAPPEAL No. 1493 of 2007\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nCROSS\nOBJECTION No. 7 of 2010\n \n\nIn\nFIRST APPEAL No. 1492 of 2007\n \n\nTo\n\n\n \n\nCROSS\nOBJECTION No. 8 of 2010 \n\n \n\nIn\nFIRST APPEAL No. 1493 of 2007\n \n\n \nFor\nApproval and Signature: \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE KS\nJHAVERI \n=========================================================\n\n\n\t \n\t\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t  \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n\n\t \n\t\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t  \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n\n\t \n\t\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t  \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n\n\t \n\t\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t  \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n\n\t \n\t\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t  \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n=========================================================\n\n \n\nTHE\nSPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER &amp; 1 - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nTHE\nBHARUCH UDYOGNAGAR SANGH LIMITED - Defendant(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n\n \n\nAppearance\n: \nMR\nJANAK RAVAL, LD.ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER\nfor\nAppellant(s) : 1 - 2. \nMR PUSHPADATTA VYAS for Defendant(s) :\n1, \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 11\/07\/2011\n \n\nCOMMON\nORAL JUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>By<br \/>\n\tway of present appeals, the appellants have challenged the legality<br \/>\n\tand validity of the judgment and award dated 30th April<br \/>\n\t2005 passed by the Joint District Judge and Fast Track Court No.2,<br \/>\n\tBharuch in Land Reference Case Nos.161 and 162 of 1998, whereby the<br \/>\n\tReference Court has partly allowed the said Reference Cases in<br \/>\n\tfavour of the respondent-original claimant. As against the same, the<br \/>\n\trespondent-original claimant has also filed Cross Objection Nos.7<br \/>\n\tand 8 of 2010 challenging the legality and validity of the very<br \/>\n\tjudgment and award to the extent that the Reference Court has not<br \/>\n\tallowed the claim\/ Reference of the respondent herein for more than<br \/>\n\tRs.100\/- and at least for Rs.200\/- with enhancement under different<br \/>\n\theads.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe<br \/>\n\tfacts in brief are that the competent authority under the Land<br \/>\n\tAcquisition Act made a proposal for acquisition of the lands<br \/>\n\tbelonging to the respondent-original claimant. After following due<br \/>\n\tprocedure, the land came to be acquired. Award came to be passed by<br \/>\n\tthe competent authority fixing the amount of compensation. However,<br \/>\n\tbeing dissatisfied with the said award, the respondent-original<br \/>\n\tclaimant raised dispute, by way of a Reference. The Reference Court<br \/>\n\tpartly allowed the same by way of the impugned award. Hence, present<br \/>\n\tappeals as well as cross objections.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.Janak<br \/>\n\tRaval, learned Assistant Government Pleader, for the appellants, has<br \/>\n\tsubmitted that the Reference Court has erred in granting Rs.1 lac<br \/>\n\ttowards construction and tube-well, etc.; that in the year 1990 the<br \/>\n\tlands were acquired and at that time the notified area was not<br \/>\n\tdeveloped and thus, the Reference Court has erred in awarding<br \/>\n\tadditional compensation; that the Reference Court has failed to<br \/>\n\tappreciate the sale instances produced vide Exhibits 37 to 44 and<br \/>\n\tthat the Reference Court has erred in relying upon the report of the<br \/>\n\tvaluation of the year 1993. In view of aforesaid submissions, it is<br \/>\n\tprayed that present appeals may be allowed by setting aside the<br \/>\n\timpugned judgment and award.\n<\/p>\n<p>As<br \/>\n\tagainst the same, Mr.Pushpadatta Vyas, learned advocate for the<br \/>\n\trespondent-original claimant, has submitted that  the respondent was<br \/>\n\tentitled to minimum Rs.200\/- per sq.mtr. or more with consequential<br \/>\n\tbenefits; that the Reference<br \/>\n\tCourt has erred in appreciating the fact to the extent that the<br \/>\n\tprice of the similar land as per the record produced by the<br \/>\n\tappellant herein was more than Rs.100\/- per sq.mtr. in the year 1987<br \/>\n\tto 1989; that the Reference Court has failed to appreciate that the<br \/>\n\twitness of the appellant failed to make him available for<br \/>\n\tcross-examination and, therefore, the version of the respondent<br \/>\n\therein ought to have been believed. It is also submitted that so far<br \/>\n\tas the contentions raised by the appellant are concerned, the<br \/>\n\tReference Court has after taking into consideration the relevant<br \/>\n\taspects of the matter and appreciating the evidence on record come<br \/>\n\tto the impugned conclusion, which is just and proper  to the extent<br \/>\n\tas aforesaid. In view of aforesaid, it is prayed that the appeals<br \/>\n\tfiled by the appellant-State<br \/>\n\tmay be dismissed and the cross-objections filed by the<br \/>\n\trespondent-original claimant may be allowed as prayed for.\n<\/p>\n<p>Having<br \/>\n\tconsidered the rival contentions raised by the learned advocates for<br \/>\n\tthe respective parties, averments made in the appeal memos,<br \/>\n\tcross-objections and the documentary evidence produced on record as<br \/>\n\twell as the impugned judgment and award, it transpires that the<br \/>\n\tReference Court has after taking into consideration the report of<br \/>\n\tthe valuer at Exhibit 33 and the value of construction in the year<br \/>\n\t1990 has rightly granted the amount of Rs.60,000\/- towards<br \/>\n\tconstruction of office room, bore-well and pump-room, which was<br \/>\n\tabout 40.80 sq.mtrs. as against the amount of about Rs.81,000\/-.<br \/>\n\tFurther, the Reference Court has after taking into consideration the<br \/>\n\tvery report of the valuer at Exhibit 33 and taking into<br \/>\n\tconsideration the fact that pipeline can be withdrawn from one place<br \/>\n\tand reinstalled at another place awarded the amount of Rs.40,000\/-<br \/>\n\tas against the amount of Rs.2 lacs suggested by the valuer. Thus,<br \/>\n\ttaking into consideration the overall aspects of the matter, it<br \/>\n\ttranspires that the Reference Court has rightly awarded an amount of<br \/>\n\tRs.1 lac towards construction and tube-well.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.1<br \/>\n\tSo<br \/>\nfar as the contention of the respondent-original claimant that the<br \/>\nrespondent ought to have been awarded an amount of Rs.200\/- per<br \/>\nsq.mtr. is concerned, it is required to be noted that the Reference<br \/>\nCourt has after taking into consideration the sale instance No.7<br \/>\nproduced on record vide Exhibit 7 in respect of a big piece of land<br \/>\nsituated nearby the lands in question, awarded an amount of Rs.100\/-<br \/>\nper sq.mtr. qua the acquired lands. In fact and in reality, it is<br \/>\npertinent to note that the Reference Court has erred in taking into<br \/>\nconsideration the fact that the market value of the said land at the<br \/>\nrelevant point of time was Rs.105.02 ps. and, therefore, the same<br \/>\nwould have been considered for the lands in question, which were<br \/>\nacquired in the year 1988.  Further, it is required to be noted that<br \/>\nthe notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was<br \/>\npublished in the year 1990 and the market value of the nearby land as<br \/>\naforesaid was Rs.105.02 ps. was fixed in the year 1988. Thus, the<br \/>\nReference Court ought to have fixed the price of the lands in<br \/>\nquestion at Rs.105.02 ps. per sq.mtr. in the year 1988 and thereby,<br \/>\nthe respondent-original claimant ought to have been 10% increase per<br \/>\nyear, which comes to 20% since the notification under Section 4 was<br \/>\npublished in the year 1990. Thus, the respondent-original claimant is<br \/>\nentitled to additional amount of Rs.21.04 ps. per sq.mtr. and total<br \/>\nRs.126.04 ps. per sq.mtr. for the lands in question.\n<\/p>\n<p>For<br \/>\n\tthe foregoing reasons, present appeals fail and are, accordingly,<br \/>\n\tdismissed. No order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\tThe<br \/>\n\tcross-objections are hereby partly allowed. The respondent-original<br \/>\n\tclaimant is entitled to additional<br \/>\n\tamount of Rs.21.04 ps. per sq.mtr. and total Rs.126.04<br \/>\n\tps. per sq.mtr. for the lands in question. No order as to costs.<br \/>\n\tAward be drawn accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>(K.S.\n<\/p>\n<p>Jhaveri, J)<\/p>\n<p>Aakar<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court The vs The on 11 July, 2011 Author: Ks Jhaveri, Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print FA\/1492\/2007 6\/ 6 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 1492 of 2007 With FIRST APPEAL No. 1493 of 2007 With CROSS OBJECTION No. 7 of 2010 In FIRST APPEAL [&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":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-121347","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>The vs The on 11 July, 2011 - 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\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The vs The on 11 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-07-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-13T03:16:03+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\\\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The vs The on 11 July, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-07-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-13T03:16:03+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1008,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011\",\"name\":\"The vs The on 11 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-07-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-13T03:16:03+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The vs The on 11 July, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"The vs The on 11 July, 2011 - 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\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The vs The on 11 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-07-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-13T03:16:03+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\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The vs The on 11 July, 2011","datePublished":"2011-07-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-13T03:16:03+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011"},"wordCount":1008,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011","name":"The vs The on 11 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-07-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-13T03:16:03+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-on-11-july-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The vs The on 11 July, 2011"}]},{"@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\/121347","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=121347"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/121347\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=121347"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=121347"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=121347"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}