{"id":127151,"date":"2008-04-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-04-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008"},"modified":"2014-08-04T12:21:11","modified_gmt":"2014-08-04T06:51:11","slug":"abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008","title":{"rendered":"Abdulrazak S\/O … vs The Lao Cum Asst Commr on 11 April, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Abdulrazak S\/O … vs The Lao Cum Asst Commr on 11 April, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy<\/div>\n
\ufb02it --.\n\nII!\" 'T'''- HEGH ('J('J\"l.'I\".l'tT IT)?' ENTAISA.  RE\nDATED THIS THE 1 1\"' DAY OF APRIL, 2008\nBEFORE\nTHE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE RAM MOI-IAN REDDY\n\nH  K KTnF.1Q.AIQfV\\Q H A{'\\\\\nxuu .11. .uu.u4.J\ufb01[ auvu 'unu'\n\n_o-~up..~._\n\nABDU LRAZAK\n\ns\/0 MOHAMMEDSABGIRIGAVI\nso \n\nAGRIC-ULTURIST\n\n:=e,'A'r P-IGLHA N\n\nTQ. BASAVANABAGEWADI,\nDIST: BIAJPUR.\n\n APPELLANT\nLy 4; D s H(_)SM.A__H, ADV)\nAND .\nTHE Lr\"u'-5D ACQ-UiSi'i'i0N 0FFiCER\nCUM ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER\nBIJAPUR.\n RESPONDENT\n\n{By S1-i: M NARAYANA_P_ A, AGA 1\nTHIS  FILED we 54 0}? LA ACT Aeal\ufb01\ufb02 THE\n\nJUDGMENT AND ORDER D1'. 3\nN0.a3i94 ON  FiLE GF  ii :'u\".)1')L. Ci\"v'iL a\"u'E')GE {SR\nDN.), BIJAPUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE REFERENCE\nPETITION FILED U\/S 18(2) OF LA ACT FOR ENHANCED\ncompsusxrnou AND SEEKING FURTHER ENHANCEMENT\nOF COMPESNATION. \n\n\n\n.2-\n\nTHIS MFA COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY.\nTHE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:\n\n.!III'Il:Ill!I'I\"\n L\n\nThe land owner aggrieved by the judgment and award\ndated 3. 10.200] in LAC No.83\/94 of the II Addl. Civil Judge\n(Sr.Dn), Bijapur, (for short 'Ref... _.n..; C..::. .3}. has pzeferze-3.\n\nt..._his apg.'-ea! for enhancement of wnrpensation.\n\n2. Facts<\/pre>\n
 in brief are 3 acxes 15 guntas of land in RS.
\nNo.262\/ A of Kolhar village of Bijapur District, belonging to
\nthe appellant, was  by tb… St.-am Lnmu\ufb01  Land
\nA…,ui-sitic-P. (.’.”\u00a3”‘..!’-.;.”=c:1m=.”.ssi”*-aiit %n’in’a’i\ufb01”11e”‘ {nnu . in
\nexercise of  domain power. by issuing
\nnoti\ufb01cation under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act,
\n1984. published in the Karnataka Gazette on 6.8. 1992, \ufb02ora
\npublic purpose, to wit. for construction of Water Taeatment
\nPlant- ll Stage, to supply pure water’ to Bijapur city by
\ndrawing water from Krishna river. The LAO conducted
\naward enquiry and based on sales statistics,
\ncompensai_io_ -11.- :11… _..t.. ..f RsJ?,(.\\(.F.),l- pr % fa’ <\/p>\n
:1. Th’ *–“-ilani dissatis\ufb01ed<\/p>\n
ML<\/p>\n
‘(J \\<\/p>\n
 the quantnru of compensa\ufb01o” so gut r-*feae.na~ of his
\nclaim under Section 18(1) of the Act for enhancexnent of
\ncompensation. and an reference, the Reference Court
\nIecoxded the evidence of the appellant as PW-1, marked 26
\ndocuments as Exs.P1 to P26. while for the respondent-LAO,
\nthe copy of the award was marked as Ex.D1. The Reference<\/p>\n
Court placing reliance upon Ex.P23. the judgment and<\/p>\n
..9…. dt. 1-14,1999 in LAC 258197 \ufb01xing the market value<\/p>\n
I
\nHF<\/p>\n
Rs.72.%i- per acre of RS. !*.’e.265,’ 1. belonging m ..ne
\nBahasaheb Tahsildar.  adjacent to the land in
\nquestion. and acquired under the plehmmary’ ‘ noti\ufb01cation
\ndated 15.12.94 for the very same public purpose. accepted
\nthe same as dependable basis, deducted 25% of the said
\ncompensation amount. at 10% depreciation for every year. in
\nView of the diiference of 2 years 4 months and 09 days<\/p>\n
 the dates of plelinljnmy noti\ufb01cations i.e. 6.8.1992<\/p>\n
rl ‘IR
\nu. Lu-\n<\/p>\n
h-I<\/p>\n
2. 1994. m \ufb01x, t..e mar.-_.t val: – f he  land<\/p>\n
E3<\/p>\n
,, l”‘A I\\l\\l’\\<\/p>\n
at ‘Rs.:H,uuui – ‘ ‘ ‘ 7 5……\n<\/p>\n
award.\n<\/p>\n
. ‘ t:….::…… .4’ 1… ‘1::..r-……….,…..
\nvvauav uuwuauug Luv \\.iI.I).l.V|.r'”I..l’ierE-is  \ufb02ile .I.l..I.MaI.l-ll.’ U]. .I:.I.IU IVCIUJGLIIX5<\/p>\n
 in  the market vaiue of the acquired land,
\ncontends that the land in question is at a distance of 40 ions
\nby road from Bijapur city and is located in the well developed
\nvicinity of Kolhar village where the appellant was growing
\nsugarcane and securing an yield of 70 tons per acre. the
\nprice of which was Rs.700\/- per ton. the essential<\/p>\n
ingredients to determine the market value by capitalisation<\/p>\n
m-t___… w.__..h’ h t..- .hJ!.-L”.1′, d\ufb02 no- new …~…x;-…n=.g m t..e
\n‘mm–“\ufb02ed ca’:-nn\ufb01l aitzheugh th-i” “v’v”S -0 proof in “‘e f’nn of<\/p>\n
records to estabiish that on the date of acquisition
\nsugarcane was grown on the land, its yield or price.
\nnevertheless the evidence of PW -1. the appellant land owner
\nnot seriously cross-examined over the said facts. coupled
\nwith the fact that indisputably the acquired land was
\nirrigated land having source of water from Krishna river<\/p>\n
carried throu\ufb02 pipes, there was no reason for the Refermce<\/p>\n
…..- n..t. t. deternzine the marl-.’.et sales by adopting<\/p>\n
‘ “‘ . “u’ei\\<\/p>\n
-5…\n<\/p>\n
‘i. it is next contended that FW-1 testified to the
\nconveyance of a plot of land measuring 15 x 30 it under
\nEx.P3, sale deed dt. 30.11.92 for a sale consideration of
\nRs.3,500[- located adjacent to the land in question. a well
\ndeveloped locality with potential for further development,
\nand so reckoning the value of one acre of land being<\/p>\n
Rs.3,80,000,I-, deducting  tow\ufb01s t_’l_-v.\n<\/p>\n
Acconiing to the learned counsel, the Reference Court fell in
\nerror in not accepting Ex.F’3 as a contemporaneous sale
\ndeed, a dependable basis to determine Market Value on sales
\nstatistics. It is lastly contended that the Reference Court
\nwas not justified in accepting Rs.72.000\/- per acre as the
\nmarket value \ufb01xed for Rs. No.265[1 in its judgment and
\naward in LAC 253\/97 Ex.P23, though the appellant placed<\/p>\n
on record distinctive  of \u00a3i@I1_t:3.t_i\u00a2..3″..!.”;. m_n:.\n<\/p>\n
\ufb01mpriawlyr that the land in qtaesti\ufb01n ‘was much mwe<\/p>\n
valnabie  the lands in  “o.2’6ESi 1, entitling the<\/p>\n
appellant to  compensation. According-“to the learned<\/p>\n
counsel, the depreciation at the rate of 25% of Rs.72_.O00\/- .
\n.I J<\/p>\n
5. Per contra, learned Addl. Govennnent Advocate<\/p>\n
contends that the appe\ufb02t having f\ufb02ed to I;_r..|a.r.=e relevant<\/p>\n
 muchles location of the acquired land in a
\ndeveloped area in Kolhar-village or the record ofrights of the
\nacquired lands for the year 1992 disclosing surgareane
\nhaving been gmwn, its yield and price, the Reference Court
\ncannot be found fault with for not having determined the
\nMarket value by capitalisation method. Learned counsel
\nhastens to add that the sale deed Ex.P3 does not disclose the
\n‘S?-=-N-C’? in which the site is .f.’r..rr.!;.n;-.:d except menmmg-pthe
\nF” “‘ “st nu’-nber.  the honndaries of the iii’I’.J”i’1c”i”i._’y’
\nconveyed  also do not disclose the site is
\nadjacent to the land acquired so as to constitute a
\ncontemporaneous sale deed. a dependable basis to
\ndetermine market value of the acquired land. It is next
\nsubmitted that the appellant placed reliance on Ex.P23<\/p>\n
Judgment and award dt. 13.4.1999 in LAC 258I97.- as a<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
.7-\n<\/p>\n
dependable basis to determine the market value of the
\nacquired land and there\ufb01ne. the appellant cannot be allowed<\/p>\n
to approbate and iepmbate.\n<\/p>\n
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties.
\nexamined the impugned Judgment and humid. perused the
\nmaterial on record. the evidence both oral and documentaly.
\nthe only question that mines for decision making is- whether
\nin the L oi_it.:I_In:_stanc:s 3.1’… e-.’…….w on 21-=-….:o:=.i, the<\/p>\n
ad-:\ufb02….eI<\/p>\n
“‘”‘ e wen” j”eiuuuu in \ufb01xing l.l.l. manstet<\/p>\n
R-…”e.’*e’.1-*-me. \\.-‘|J’<\/p>\n
5:.\n<\/p>\n
the acquired’ ‘ land at F:s.54,00l”i]’- peracie for nnga’ ‘ ted land ?\n<\/p>\n
7. Having given my anxious consideration to the<\/p>\n
‘I ‘l’l’I’iQ ‘ 51 ff P: n’I”I’i Iiiinal. the $11,-“‘.\ufb02’I”l”Ili’l’I fl-tint<\/p>\n
-.-.-_–.—-.–_..*.-u-v–u.-nu -en. -tn-av-tr inn!’-III-laavhrim. u.n._ruu-can-I-Inn  l Inlalliliu<\/p>\n
$3′<\/p>\n
tie…-~’-‘tit.-4-at-;”u land is in chm ‘””s’;rti'”tiii’@ to trial} deveio-pod area of<\/p>\n
– nonar  is unacceptable. i say so because except for<\/p>\n
the self interested testimony of PW -1, the appellant asserting
\nthat the land abuts certain building belonging to a local
\nSchool and the photographs both positive and negative.
\nwhich in my opinion. do not constitute satisfactory proof of<\/p>\n
the assertion. The mere fact that the appellant was not<\/p>\n
tit.\n<\/p>\n
-8-<\/span><\/p>\n
cross-examined on the said assertion does not necessarily
\nmean that the appellant established the said fact. It was for
\nthe appellant to place before Con\/rt ielevsnt magi.-:1<\/p>\n
oonstimting sI.I.bsts.a..u\ufb01_e1 lean’ …L..ene-.; of the %t that the<\/p>\n
it was open in the appellant to adduce the owl and
\ndocumentary evidence of the village authorities or for that
\nmatter, the map of the village which would have disclosed.
\nby way of direct evidence. as to the exact location of the
\nacquired land. It is no doubt true that the purpose of
\nacquisition is to ooznstruct a Water Treatment Plant to supply\n<\/p>\n
-pure water to Bijapur city  -I3… :3. distanw of 4.9 he by<\/p>\n
__. ‘._’l 4”<\/p>\n
103.64 that by amt! and nothing mme it ea-‘uirt he sain that
\nlands in Kolliar viilage  have the  for
\ndevelopment PW-i states that the  ‘ ” g- extent of land
\nin his possession. is under cultivation. and not used for any
\nother development activity. In these circumstances. the 1st
\ncontention of the learned counsel tor the appellant over the
\nlocation of the land in a potentially developed area of Kolhar<\/p>\n
vill\ufb02li\ufb01. must necessarily stand rejected ; 1 ..%\\<\/p>\n
‘”‘*”’='” ‘”='”‘” the land 1′. Presto-d n-cm-=”._’,’ !”.r*-1……..’='”~’*’=<\/p>\n
river nom’ where water is carried tmo” ugh pipes to ring’ ‘ ate I<\/p>\n
the lands in question. Record of rights Ex.P17 to P19 relate
\nto the year 1996-97 onwards and not the relevant year 1991-
\n92 and onwards. Yet again it is the assertion of PW–1 that
\n70 tons of sugarcane was grown on the land. the price of
\nwhich was Rs.700\/- per ton. This assertion remained<\/p>\n
uncorroborated, neither the yield certi\ufb01cate nor the price list<\/p>\n
was prsduuad. Ar-.. s..varn..i1=..-ati-.rn d the at.-and. F.-.=.r.D1 \ufb02mnisn\ufb01s
\nthat “i th’ trim’ ‘f mspee”uo” in tn”  1994, “o c-r””ps”‘ were<\/p>\n
found on the land except for pipes to draw water from the
\nriver. Therefore, in the absence of relevant material
\nregarding the crop grown on the land: its yield and income,
\nthe reference court, could not possibly determine the market
\nvalue of the acquired land by capitalisation method.\n<\/p>\n
9. The contention of the learned counsel for the
\nappellant to accept the sale deed Ex.P3 as a dependable
\nbasis to determine the market value of the land is also
\nunacceptable. P3 disclose to the contrary. Ex.P3 is a sale<\/p>\n
deed executed on 30.11.92 convevilylile a 1esidentia1_si_te<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
….-……..:….. :5 H
\nconsideration of Rs.1-3506]-. and so reckoned, the value of
\none acre of land would approximately be Rs.3,08,00D[ – and
\nhaving Iegaid to the acquisition of a large extent of land ie.
\n3 acres 15 guntas, eifecting a deduction of 60% towards
\ndevelopment charges the market value is Rs.1.25.000[- per<\/p>\n
acre. Ex.P3 cannot be considered as a contemporaneous<\/p>\n
document or a dependable basis since neither in the body of
\n‘H115 rinh-Irrnnnl’ :11′ H1\u00bb rInsu’vr’i’ni’inn nf fhn 11’rn11prI1.r in 1115-\n<\/p>\n
.:…..%1……….. 4.’!……a. .. :– –… a……….\n<\/p>\n
suueuune to Lu document. :1′: auuses uuu th” “ite 111 q
\nis located adjacent to or for that  in the  of the
\nacquired land. The evidence of PW-1 is not in the direction
\nof establishing that said site subject matter of Ex.P3 sale
\ndeed was anywhere close to the location of the  land.\n<\/p>\n
The reference court did not consider Ex.P3 as a<\/p>\n
contemporaneous document to determine the market value. =<\/p>\n
in t_he    evidence on  hence<\/p>\n
the iruinwnn-n’l’ nn\ufb02 aura i-I-n1’n’ur_r|nrI nuzrrrnnnf kn unit] in nII\ufb01”nr
\nJun one an” uncuu uurusuvu vuuuvu uv nun: uv uusnva
\n.l’_._._.__ _…._.._ 1……’ ___.. .l’_…_.L._-_.’I _’……E…._._._A_ _ ._…_.___,_._..__ _. _.._J._._I.’__._..___
\nIII)  Ilabuulluln I-y(J\\.Xa\u00a71 8-Ill. 1C.I.C CC:
\n3 H
\nU \\<\/p>\n
.31..\n<\/p>\n
it}. There is ccnsiierahle f(_)–‘(–!t_’\u00a3 in the submission of<\/p>\n
the learned  Govelninent Advocate for the
\nrespondent-LAO that it was the appellant who produced
\nEx.P23 Judgment and award dt. 13.4.1999 in LAC 258\/97
\nand sought its acceptance as a dependable basis to
\ndetermine the market value of the acquired land. The
\nJudgement and Award Ex.P23 of the Reference Court<\/p>\n
discloses that  lands in R.S..No..2a\u00a7.5,l1 I.I.r..s<\/p>\n
nc*=..’…..*’-“4 fm 5-.c”..,uisi’don uy under pre1″.niinar3′ no’.i\ufb01ca’c’.o-11 zit.\n<\/p>\n
15.12.1%4 under %tion 4{i\u00a7 of the Land Acquisition Ac,
\n1894, exactly 2 years 4 months 9 days after the issuance of
\nthe prelinzinaxy noti\ufb01cation dt. 6.8.1992 acquiring the lands
\nin question. The Reference Court in Ex.P23. \ufb01xed the
\nmarket value of the acquired land at Rs.72,000\/- per acre
\nfor irrigated land. This land indisputably is said to be
\nadjacent to the lands in question. In the absence of any<\/p>\n
 on  1ega_n.i;ng the  f__-_In:.s of<\/p>\n
di\ufb01’-.*..’=en*.ia\ufb01c:’-. between the two lands, no excep\ufb01on can ue<\/p>\n
;_,’l_nn<\/p>\n
neuron’ to the  ” *ns. \ufb01ndings and conclusions arrived at by<\/p>\n
the Reference Count by placing reliance on Ex.P23 ahs is<\/p>\n
.12.\n<\/p>\n
\ufb01epe\ufb01jabie basis to cieiennine the market vaiue of the<\/p>\n
acquired land at Rs.72.000I- per acre.\n<\/p>\n
Sd\/4*
\nTudge<\/p>\n
Ln.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Abdulrazak S\/O … vs The Lao Cum Asst Commr on 11 April, 2008 Author: Ram Mohan Reddy \ufb02it –. II!” ‘T”’- HEGH (‘J(‘J”l.’I”.l’tT IT)?’ ENTAISA. RE DATED THIS THE 1 1″‘ DAY OF APRIL, 2008 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRJUSTICE RAM MOI-IAN REDDY H K KTnF.1Q.AIQfV\\Q H A{‘\\\\ xuu .11. .uu.u4.J\ufb01[ auvu ‘unu’ […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-127151","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAbdulrazak S\/O ... vs The Lao Cum Asst Commr on 11 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Abdulrazak S\/O ... vs The Lao Cum Asst Commr on 11 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-04-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-08-04T06:51:11+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=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Abdulrazak S\\\/O … vs The Lao Cum Asst Commr on 11 April, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-04-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-08-04T06:51:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1961,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008\",\"name\":\"Abdulrazak S\\\/O ... vs The Lao Cum Asst Commr on 11 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-04-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-08-04T06:51:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Abdulrazak S\\\/O … vs The Lao Cum Asst Commr on 11 April, 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":"Abdulrazak S\/O ... vs The Lao Cum Asst Commr on 11 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Abdulrazak S\/O ... vs The Lao Cum Asst Commr on 11 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-04-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-08-04T06:51:11+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":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Abdulrazak S\/O … vs The Lao Cum Asst Commr on 11 April, 2008","datePublished":"2008-04-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-08-04T06:51:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008"},"wordCount":1961,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008","name":"Abdulrazak S\/O ... vs The Lao Cum Asst Commr on 11 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-04-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-08-04T06:51:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdulrazak-so-vs-the-lao-cum-asst-commr-on-11-april-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Abdulrazak S\/O … vs The Lao Cum Asst Commr on 11 April, 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\/127151","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=127151"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/127151\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=127151"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=127151"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=127151"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}