{"id":126631,"date":"2002-09-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-09-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002"},"modified":"2018-12-04T00:02:40","modified_gmt":"2018-12-03T18:32:40","slug":"rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002","title":{"rendered":"Rita Lal vs Raj Kumar Singh on 13 September, 2002"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Rita Lal vs Raj Kumar Singh on 13 September, 2002<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: R.C. Lahoti, Brijesh Kumar<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  5837 of 2002\n\nPETITIONER:\nRITA LAL\n\nRESPONDENT:\nRAJ KUMAR SINGH\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 13\/09\/2002\n\nBENCH:\nR.C. LAHOTI &amp; BRIJESH KUMAR\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>2002 Supp(2) SCR 403<\/p>\n<p>The following Order of the Court was delivered : Leave granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>The appellant, a widow and having undergone a kidney transplant, initiated<br \/>\nan eviction petition under Section 14 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease Rent<br \/>\nand Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter &#8220;the Act&#8221;, for short).<br \/>\nAccording to the appellant, the respondent an employee of the appellant,<br \/>\nwas inducted into possession of the premises under an agreement of lease<br \/>\ndated l0th February, 1997. The grounds on which eviction is sough for are<br \/>\nmore than one and include the genuine requirement of the premises for<br \/>\nlandlord&#8217;s self occupation and the respondent being a defaulter in payment<br \/>\nof rent.\n<\/p>\n<p>The respondent-tenant sought for leave to defend under sub- section (4) of<br \/>\nSection 14 of the Act denying the landlord-tenant relationship and<br \/>\nsubmitting that the suit property was owned by one R.N. Chakraborty, whose<br \/>\ntitle on his death had devolved upon his son, Dr. Rajat Chakraborty and<br \/>\nfrom the latter the respondent had purchased the property under registered<br \/>\ndeed of sale dated 24th February, 1998. It was submitted that as there was<br \/>\nno landlord-tenant relationship between the parties, the respondent was not<br \/>\nliable to pay rent and certainly not liable to be evicted. In the<br \/>\nsubmission of the respondent, the pleading raised a triable issue and,<br \/>\ntherefore, leave to defend ought to have been granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>The learned Trial Court having taken into consideration the pleadings of<br \/>\nthe parties, the contents of the affidavits and the supporting documents<br \/>\nformed an opinion that the pleas raised by the respondent-tenant were false<br \/>\nand frivolous and wholly unsustainable in law and hence no prima fade case<br \/>\nwas made out worth consideration for granting leave to defend. Leave to<br \/>\ndefend was, therefore, refused. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the Trial<br \/>\nCourt, the tenant preferred a revision in the High Court which revision has<br \/>\nbeen allowed by the learned Single Judge forming an opinion that a triable<br \/>\nissue within the meaning of sub- sections (4) and (5) of Section 14 of the<br \/>\nAct did arise on the pleadings of the parties and, therefore, the leave to<br \/>\ndefend deserves to be granted to the respondent- tenant.\n<\/p>\n<p>The pleadings, affidavits and the documents available on record go to show<br \/>\nthat the respondent was an employee under the appellant. On l0th day of<br \/>\nFebruary, 1997, an agreement to lease was executioned between the parties.<br \/>\nThough the execution thereof is disputed but what is not disputed are the<br \/>\nsignatures of the respondent- tenant on each of the pages of the agreement<br \/>\non which the agreement is inscribed. In the year 1993, a title suit was<br \/>\nfiled by this very appellant against Rajat Chakraborty and therein this<br \/>\nvery respondent had appeared as a witness for the plaintiff. He was<br \/>\nexamined on oath on 29th June, 1994 the Court of Munsif, Hazaribag. In his<br \/>\ndeposition he has traced the source of title of the plaintiff therein (i.e.<br \/>\nthe appellant herein) narrating the chain of sale deeds by successive<br \/>\nowners of the property including the last one of the year 1998 whereby the<br \/>\nproperty was purchased by the appellant hereinfrom one Sanjay Kumar Sinha,<br \/>\nthe then owner of the property. The land having been purchased, the<br \/>\nrespondent went on to depose, the appellant constructed two houses on the<br \/>\nland surrounded by the boundary wall. The respondent very clearly stated<br \/>\nthat the defendant (that is Rajat Chakraborty) had no title or interest in<br \/>\nthe property and the suit had to be filed by the plaintiff (i.e. the<br \/>\nappellant herein) because Rajat Chakraborty and other defendants were<br \/>\ntrying to take forcible possession of the property.\n<\/p>\n<p>There is a very clear admission made by the respondent of the title of the<br \/>\nappellant in his deposition made on oath in judicial proceedings. Not a<br \/>\nword he has stated on the pleadings showing how and under what<br \/>\ncircumstances the statement came to be made and how does the respondent<br \/>\nwriggle out of a clear admission made in his deposition? So also the<br \/>\nrespondent does not furnish any explanation worth being considered,<br \/>\nmuchless accepted, as to how his signatures appear at more than one places,<br \/>\nthat is, on every page of the rent note dated l0th February, 1997 he cannot<br \/>\nescape the consequences flowing from execution of rent note. The tenant<br \/>\nhaving been inducted by the landlord so long as he remains in possession<br \/>\ncannot deny the title of his landlord in view of the rule of estoppel<br \/>\ncontained in Section 116 of the Evidence Act. Recently in Vashu Deo v.<br \/>\nBalkishan, [2002] 2 SCC 50, we had an occasion to sum up the law as to<br \/>\nestoppel of tenant and as to eviction by title paramount and we have held:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The rule of estoppel between landlord and tenant enacted in Section 116 of<br \/>\nthe Evidence Act has three main features: (i) the tenant is estopped from<br \/>\ndisputing the title of his landlord over the tenancy premises at the<br \/>\nbeginning of the tenancy, (ii) such estoppel continues to operate so long<br \/>\nas the tenancy continues and unless the tenant has surrendered possession<br \/>\nto the landlord, and (iii) Section 116 of the Evidence Act is not the whole<br \/>\nlaw of estoppel between the landlord and tenant, The principles emerging<br \/>\nfrom Section 116 can be extended in their application and also suitably<br \/>\nadapted to suit the requirement of an individual case.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;the rule of estoppel ceases to have applicability once the<br \/>\ntenant has been evicted. His obligation to restore possession to his<br \/>\nlandlord is fulfilled either by actually fulfilling the obligation or by<br \/>\nproving his landlord&#8217;s title having been extinguished by a paramount title-<br \/>\nholder&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>The trial court rightly formed the opinion that no triable issue was<br \/>\nraised.\n<\/p>\n<p>The learned counsel for the respondent has placed reliance on the law laid<br \/>\ndown by this Court in the case of Charan Daas Duggal v. Brahma Nand. [1983]<br \/>\nl SCC 30 and two decisions of Patna High Court in Md. Fahimuddin v. Godhan<br \/>\nPd. Singh, (1992) 2 PLJR 352 and Bijoy Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar &amp;<br \/>\nOrs., (1992) l PLJR 123. There can be no quarrel with the proposition laid<br \/>\ndown in these decided cases relied on by the learned counsel for the<br \/>\nrespondent. The law is settled that if the tenant has made out a prima fade<br \/>\ncase raising such pleas that a triable issue would emerge then that would<br \/>\nbe sufficient to grant leave. The case law cited at the Bar itself goes to<br \/>\nshow that even at that stage the Trial Court is not precluded from forming<br \/>\nan opinion whether on the material available on record, a triable issue,<br \/>\nthat is, issue worth being tried arises or not. Raising a triable issue, as<br \/>\nsub-section (5) of Section 14 suggests is disclosing by tenant in his<br \/>\naffidavit such facts as would disentitle the landlord from obtaining an<br \/>\norder of eviction. If the Court is satisfied that though in the pleadings<br \/>\nan issue is raised but that is not a triable issue than the Court is<br \/>\njustified in refusing the leave to defend. A defence, which is practically<br \/>\nmoonshine, sham or illusory cannot be held to be raising a triable issue.<br \/>\nElse the whole purpose behind enacting a provision for granting leave to<br \/>\ndefend, and not permitting a contest unless leave was granted, would stand<br \/>\ndefeated.\n<\/p>\n<p>In the facts and circumstance of the case, noticed hereinabove, it is clear<br \/>\nthat the defendant is raising a plea which he is estopped form raising and,<br \/>\ntherefore, the plea raised by him in his affidavit seeking leave to defend<br \/>\ndoes not amount to raising a triable issue, In our opinion, the High Court,<br \/>\nin exercise of revisional jurisdiction, ought not to have interfered with<br \/>\nthe well considered and reasoned order of the Trial Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order of the<br \/>\nHigh Court is set aside and that of the Trial Court restored. The<br \/>\nrespondent shall pay the costs incurred by the appellant<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Rita Lal vs Raj Kumar Singh on 13 September, 2002 Bench: R.C. Lahoti, Brijesh Kumar CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 5837 of 2002 PETITIONER: RITA LAL RESPONDENT: RAJ KUMAR SINGH DATE OF JUDGMENT: 13\/09\/2002 BENCH: R.C. LAHOTI &amp; BRIJESH KUMAR JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT 2002 Supp(2) SCR 403 The following Order of the Court [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-126631","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Rita Lal vs Raj Kumar Singh on 13 September, 2002 - 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\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Rita Lal vs Raj Kumar Singh on 13 September, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002\" \/>\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=\"2002-09-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-12-03T18:32:40+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Rita Lal vs Raj Kumar Singh on 13 September, 2002\",\"datePublished\":\"2002-09-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-03T18:32:40+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002\"},\"wordCount\":1329,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002\",\"name\":\"Rita Lal vs Raj Kumar Singh on 13 September, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2002-09-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-03T18:32:40+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Rita Lal vs Raj Kumar Singh on 13 September, 2002\"}]},{\"@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":"Rita Lal vs Raj Kumar Singh on 13 September, 2002 - 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\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Rita Lal vs Raj Kumar Singh on 13 September, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2002-09-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-12-03T18:32:40+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Rita Lal vs Raj Kumar Singh on 13 September, 2002","datePublished":"2002-09-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-03T18:32:40+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002"},"wordCount":1329,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002","name":"Rita Lal vs Raj Kumar Singh on 13 September, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2002-09-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-03T18:32:40+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rita-lal-vs-raj-kumar-singh-on-13-september-2002#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Rita Lal vs Raj Kumar Singh on 13 September, 2002"}]},{"@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\/126631","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=126631"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/126631\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=126631"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=126631"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=126631"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}