{"id":127061,"date":"2008-11-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008"},"modified":"2016-11-11T23:11:40","modified_gmt":"2016-11-11T17:41:40","slug":"kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"Kanubhai vs Dy on 11 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Kanubhai vs Dy on 11 November, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Jayant Patel,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\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\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/6016\/2001\t 7\/ 7\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 6016 of 2001\n \n\n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nKANUBHAI\nR SHAH - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\n\nDY.\nSECRETARY &amp; 1   Respondent(s)\n \n\nAppearance\n:\n \n\nMR MM\nTIRMIZI for\nPetitioner(s) : 1, \nMR PANDYA, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1  \n2. \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 JAYANT PATEL\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 11\/11\/2008 \n\n \n\n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tshort facts of the case appears to be that the petitioner was<br \/>\n\tPresident of the Chhota Udepur Nagar Palika (hereinafter referred to<br \/>\n\tas the  Municipality ).  During the period when it was Nagar<br \/>\n\tPanchayat, a resolution was passed for purchase of casting pipelines<br \/>\n\tfor water connection.  The sanction was obtained from the District<br \/>\n\tDevelopment Officer for purchase of such pipelines.  However, it<br \/>\n\tappears that thereafter in the General Board Resolution dated<br \/>\n\t16.11.1989 the word &#8216;PVC&#8217; was added in addition to the casting<br \/>\n\tpipelines by putting slash (\/).  The said resolution of the<br \/>\n\tMunicipality was not forwarded to the Collector for review or for<br \/>\n\tsanction by any competent authority.  The petitioner, in capacity as<br \/>\n\tthe President of the Nagar Palika, sanctioned the quotations<br \/>\n\treceived from M\/s.A.King Pipes, Nadiad.  The pertinent aspect is<br \/>\n\tthat no tender was invited for purchasing of PVC pipes.  The<br \/>\n\tpetitioner thereafter placed the order to a different party namely;<br \/>\n\tSupreme Agency, Jalgaon for purchase of the PVC pipes and the<br \/>\n\tpayment was made to such party.  It further appears that no approval<br \/>\n\tof the General Body was obtained by the petitioner for such purpose.\n<\/p>\n<p>As<br \/>\n\tthe pipeline was substituted by &#8216;PVC&#8217; in place of casting pipe,<br \/>\n\tthere was opposition from the local people and as a result thereof,<br \/>\n\tthe work of laying down of the pipelines was stopped.  Since the<br \/>\n\tpipe remained unused, they were sold by inviting offers from the<br \/>\n\tpublic, but as no response was there, ultimately they were sold<br \/>\n\tafter getting permission of the District Planning Unit.  The price<br \/>\n\treceived of the pipes was considered and it was found that the<br \/>\n\tamount of Rs.53,498.70 was received less than the price paid by the<br \/>\n\tMunicipality for purchasing of the pipes and there was also expenses<br \/>\n\tincurred of Rs.18,040.75  for disposal of the pipes and total<br \/>\n\tRs.71,539.45 was found as the loss caused to the Municipality.  The<br \/>\n\tproceedings were initiated by the Collector under Section 267 of the<br \/>\n\tAct and the petitioner was given opportunity of hearing.  After<br \/>\n\tconsidering the record, it is found by the Collector that there was<br \/>\n\ttampering of record by the petitioner in the Resolution No.18 and<br \/>\n\tthe pipes were illegally purchased and there was no proper exercise<br \/>\n\tof the duty for purchase of the pipe, which had resulted into a loss<br \/>\n\tto the Municipality of Rs.71,539.45, for which the petitioner was<br \/>\n\tfound as responsible and, therefore, the said amount was ordered to<br \/>\n\tbe recovered from him as per the order dated 6.4.1996.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tpetitioner carried the matter before the State Government in<br \/>\n\trevision.  The State Government called for the record and<br \/>\n\treappreciated the evidence and it has also found that there was<br \/>\n\ttampering of the record by the petitioner, the pipes were purchased<br \/>\n\twithout prior sanction and the powers were exercised in an arbitrary<br \/>\n\tmanner, which had resulted into the loss to the Municipality to the<br \/>\n\ttune of Rs.71,539.45.  Therefore, the revision was dismissed and the<br \/>\n\torder of the Collector was confirmed.  It is under these<br \/>\n\tcircumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court by the<br \/>\n\tpresent petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>Heard<br \/>\n\tMr.Tirmizi, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Pandya,<br \/>\n\tlearned AGP for the respondent State Government and its authorities.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.Tirmizi,<br \/>\n\tlearned Counsel for the petitioner raised the first contention that<br \/>\n\tthe ground submitted in the reply of the petitioner dated 12.3.2001<br \/>\n\twere not considered by the State Government.  In furtherance to his<br \/>\n\tsubmission, by relying upon the reply dated 12.3.2001   Annexure<br \/>\n\t C  before the State Government, it was submitted that the upset<br \/>\n\tprice of the pipes were not fixed and the pipes were sold away at a<br \/>\n\tlower price and the said aspect was not considered.  He submitted<br \/>\n\tthat if the matter is remanded to the State Government for<br \/>\n\treconsideration the same shall meet with the ends of justice.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tperusal of the order passed by the lower Authorities and more<br \/>\n\tparticularly of the Collector shows that thrice advertisements were<br \/>\n\tgiven for disposal of the pipes and in spite of the same, no<br \/>\n\tpurchaser came forward to submit offer for purchase of the pipes.<br \/>\n\tThe cost of the advertisement was Rs.18,040.75.  Therefore, it is<br \/>\n\tnot a case where without inviting offer by public advertisements,<br \/>\n\tthe pipes are sold away. Further for the offer of Rs.1,84,839\/-,<br \/>\n\tsanction of the competent authority was obtained.  Therefore, under<br \/>\n\tthese circumstances, even if the contention of the petitioner of<br \/>\n\tnon-fixation of the upset price is considered, it would not alter<br \/>\n\tthe ultimate result, nor can it be said that the offer was accepted<br \/>\n\tfor sale of the pipes in an arbitrary manner at R.1,84,839\/-, more<br \/>\n\tparticularly when the sanction was obtained of the competent<br \/>\n\tauthority.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.Tirmizi,<br \/>\n\tlearned Counsel for the petitioner next contended that the order is<br \/>\n\tnot a well reasoned order and all contentions raised on behalf of<br \/>\n\tthe petitioner are not considered.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tperusal of the order passed by the Collector read with the order of<br \/>\n\tthe State Government shows that there is examination of all the<br \/>\n\trecord of the Municipality by the Collector as well as by the State<br \/>\n\tGovernment.  It is found that there is tampering in the resolution<br \/>\n\tand the pipes are purchased without prior sanction of the competent<br \/>\n\tauthority, the payment is made without prior approval of the General<br \/>\n\tBody and all such acts are done by the petitioner, which has<br \/>\n\tresulted into the loss to the Municipality of Rs.71,539.45.<br \/>\n\tTherefore, it is not possible to accept the contention of the<br \/>\n\tlearned Counsel for the petitioner that the impugned orders are not<br \/>\n\twell reasoned orders.\n<\/p>\n<p>It<br \/>\n\tdeserves to be recorded that the petition arises against the order<br \/>\n\tpassed by the Collector and its confirmation thereof by the State<br \/>\n\tGovernment.  Both the authorities have examined the record,<br \/>\n\tappreciated and reappreciated the evidence and have concluded the<br \/>\n\tissues on facts. No facts contrary to the same are brought on record<br \/>\n\tby the petitioner.  The scope of the petition is not as that of the<br \/>\n\tCourt of appeal. Unless the powers are exercised in a perverse<br \/>\n\tmanner, it would not be a case for interference. No such case is<br \/>\n\tdemonstrated in the petition. Under these circumstances, it is not a<br \/>\n\tcase where the impugned order deserves to be modified by this Court<br \/>\n\tin a petition under Article 226\/227 of the Constitution of India.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tthe result, the petition is meritless and hence, dismissed.  Rule<br \/>\n\tdischarged.  I.R., if any, stands vacated.  No order as to cost.\n<\/p>\n<pre>11.11.2008\t\t\t\t\t(Jayant\nPatel, J.)\n \n\n\nvinod\n\n    \n\n \n\t   \n      \n      \n\t    \n\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\n\t   \n      \n\t  \t    \n\t\t   Top\n\t   \n      \n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Kanubhai vs Dy on 11 November, 2008 Author: Jayant Patel,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/6016\/2001 7\/ 7 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6016 of 2001 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may [&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-127061","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>Kanubhai vs Dy on 11 November, 2008 - 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\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kanubhai vs Dy on 11 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-11T17:41:40+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=\"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\\\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kanubhai vs Dy on 11 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-11T17:41:40+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1080,\"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\\\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008\",\"name\":\"Kanubhai vs Dy on 11 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-11T17:41:40+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kanubhai vs Dy on 11 November, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Kanubhai vs Dy on 11 November, 2008 - 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\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kanubhai vs Dy on 11 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-11T17:41:40+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kanubhai vs Dy on 11 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-11T17:41:40+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008"},"wordCount":1080,"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\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008","name":"Kanubhai vs Dy on 11 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-11T17:41:40+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kanubhai-vs-dy-on-11-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kanubhai vs Dy on 11 November, 2008"}]},{"@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\/127061","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=127061"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/127061\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=127061"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=127061"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=127061"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}