{"id":128986,"date":"2008-10-31T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-10-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008"},"modified":"2015-05-20T11:43:59","modified_gmt":"2015-05-20T06:13:59","slug":"r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008","title":{"rendered":")R.Sudalaimuthu vs )Ponnuchamy Ambalam on 31 October, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">)R.Sudalaimuthu vs )Ponnuchamy Ambalam on 31 October, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED : 31\/10\/2008\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.PALANIVELU\n\nC.R.P.(PD)(MD).No.138 of 2008\nand\nM.P.(MD).No.1 of 2008\n\n1)R.Sudalaimuthu\t\t\t\t\t   ...  Petitioner\n\nVs.\n\n1)Ponnuchamy Ambalam\n2)Thiruppathy\n3)Thangapandi\t\t\t\t\t\t   ...  Respondents\n\n\nCivil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of\nIndia against the order dated 11.01.2008 passed in I.A.No.935 of 2007 in\nO.S.No.475 of 2007 by the First Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai.\n\t\t\n!For Petitioner   ... Mr.T.R.Jeyapalam\n^For Respondents  ... Mr.M.Vallinayagam\n\t\t\t\t\t\t   ****\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tThe petitioner is the plaintiff, who filed a suit in O.S.No.475 of 2007 on<br \/>\nthe file of First Additional Subordinate Court, Madurai for permanent<br \/>\ninjunction.  Pending trial of the case, the defendants filed an application in<br \/>\nI.A.No.935 of 2007 under Order 26 Rule 9 and Section 151 CPC for appointment of<br \/>\nan Advocate Commissioner to inspect the suit property, to note down the nature<br \/>\nof the suit land and other physical features thereon and file his report.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2.\tIn the affidavit, it is stated that the first petitioner \/ first<br \/>\ndefendant is the cultivating tenant in a portion of the land and that they have<br \/>\nbeen in possession for over 75 years.  It is further stated that the nature of<br \/>\nthe suit property has to be established to substantiate their contentions and<br \/>\nthat it was originally a nanja land at the time of institution of suit also be<br \/>\nshown.  It is further alleged that after obtaining ex parte ad-interim<br \/>\ninjunction,  the plaintiff has collected mud and quarry materials and put the<br \/>\nsame in the suit land and thereby, made the suit field unfit for cultivation.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3.\tIn the counter filed by the plaintiff, it is fairly admitted that he<br \/>\nhas collected 300 lorry loads of mud and quarry waste and dumped them on the<br \/>\nland in question.  As such, there is no need for local inspection to find out<br \/>\nthe nature of the land.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4.\tThe learned First Additional Sub-judge, Madurai, by means of his<br \/>\norder dated 11.01.2008 directed appointment of an Advocate Commissioner and to<br \/>\nfile his report with plan.  He has observed that in order to find out the<br \/>\nalteration of the suit property into house sites, stated to have been done, in<br \/>\nwhat manner and from what point of time the said activities is going on, have to<br \/>\nbe seen, so as to arrive at a final decision in this case.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5.\tLearned counsel for the petitioner Mr.T.R.Jeyapalam would submit<br \/>\nthat there is no necessity for appointment of Advocate Commissioner inasmuch as<br \/>\nthere is no dispute from the side of the plaintiff with regard to the location<br \/>\nof the property, measurement of the property and the nature of the suit land.<br \/>\nIt is his further contention that even the plaintiff in the counter has fairly<br \/>\nadmitted that he has dumped 300 lorry loads of mud and quarry materials in the<br \/>\nsuit land and the even if the Advocate Commissioner is appointed, no useful<br \/>\npurpose would be served.  He also submits that the possession of the property<br \/>\ncould not also be found out by an Advocate Commissioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would draw attention of this Court<br \/>\nreported in 2006 (5) CTC 178, T.K.Krishnamurthy Vs. Tamil Nadu Water and Drinage<br \/>\nBoard and others, where, this Court has decided that the report of the Advocate<br \/>\nCommissioner can never be the basis for deciding the Suit as Commissioner should<br \/>\nnot be appointed to gather evidence to prove the case of the parties. Further,<br \/>\nhe cited a decision in the case of Chandrasekaran &amp; 6 Others Vs. V.Doss Naidu<br \/>\nreported in 2006 (2) L.W. 159, wherein, it is observed that the power is<br \/>\nconferred on the Court to appoint Commissioner to make local inspection and not<br \/>\nto collect evidence; but only to obtain evidence. He also brought to the notice<br \/>\nof this Court a decision reported in 2002 (3) Law Weekly 707, Perumal and others<br \/>\nVs. Raji Gounder and others in which this Court has held that when the identity<br \/>\nof the property is not in dispute, appointment of Advocate Commissioner is<br \/>\ntotally unwarranted.  Added further, a learned Judge of this Court in a decision<br \/>\nreported in 2000-3-L.W.787, R.Satyanarayana Rao and 3 others Vs. M.K.Manoharan @<br \/>\nK.Manoharan and another has held that when the identity of the matter is not a<br \/>\nmatter in issue, and when the suit is also not one filed for recovery of<br \/>\nproperty, there is no necessity to issue a Commission.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7.\tAs far as the facts of the case in hand are concerned, there is no<br \/>\ndispute with regard to the identity and measurement of the property.  However,<br \/>\nthe defendants desired to elucidate before the Court as to the nature of the<br \/>\nproperty as on today.  It is true that the plaintiff has admitted in his counter<br \/>\nthat he has gathered mud and quarry materials in the suit property.  However,<br \/>\nthe Court could not find whether any further development has been made by<br \/>\ndumping the mud and quarry on the property, so as to alter the character of the<br \/>\nproperty.  It is seen that the order was passed as early as on 11.01.2008 and<br \/>\nnine months are over by this time.  It is pleaded by the defendants that the<br \/>\nsuit property is a cultivable land and in order to adjudicate the rights of the<br \/>\nparties, the present nature of the property should be shown to the Court at the<br \/>\ntime of trial.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8.\tEven though there is an admission on the part the plaintiff with<br \/>\nregard to the gathering of the materials in the suit land, for the purpose of<br \/>\nfinding out the portion, which is said to have been altered has to be seen in<br \/>\nthis case. As a result of that, it will be helpful for the Court to arrive at a<br \/>\nfinal decision in this case.  While the balance of convenience is considered,<br \/>\nthe plaintiff will not in any way be prejudiced by the appointment of the<br \/>\nAdvocate Commissioner and the inspection of the Advocate Commissioner may serve<br \/>\npurposes of both the parties. The Advocate Commissioner may not find out at what<br \/>\npoint of time the materials were collected, but he can say to what extent the<br \/>\nproperty has been altered enabling the Court to know the present plight of the<br \/>\nland. This would include the noting of physical features of the property also.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9.\tIn view of the fore-going reasons, this Court is of the opinion that<br \/>\nthere is no impediment for the appointment of the Advocate Commissioner and the<br \/>\norder passed by the Court below does not warrant any interference from this<br \/>\nCourt, which deserves to be confirmed and accordingly, it is confirmed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10.\tIn fine, the civil revision petition is dismissed. Consequently,<br \/>\nconnected M.P. is closed. No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>ssm<\/p>\n<p>To<br \/>\nThe First Additional Subordinate Judge,<br \/>\nMadurai.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court )R.Sudalaimuthu vs )Ponnuchamy Ambalam on 31 October, 2008 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 31\/10\/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.PALANIVELU C.R.P.(PD)(MD).No.138 of 2008 and M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2008 1)R.Sudalaimuthu &#8230; Petitioner Vs. 1)Ponnuchamy Ambalam 2)Thiruppathy 3)Thangapandi &#8230; Respondents Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-128986","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>)R.Sudalaimuthu vs )Ponnuchamy Ambalam on 31 October, 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\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\")R.Sudalaimuthu vs )Ponnuchamy Ambalam on 31 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-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=\"2008-10-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-05-20T06:13:59+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\\\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\")R.Sudalaimuthu vs )Ponnuchamy Ambalam on 31 October, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-20T06:13:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1051,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008\",\"name\":\")R.Sudalaimuthu vs )Ponnuchamy Ambalam on 31 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-20T06:13:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\")R.Sudalaimuthu vs )Ponnuchamy Ambalam on 31 October, 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":")R.Sudalaimuthu vs )Ponnuchamy Ambalam on 31 October, 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\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":")R.Sudalaimuthu vs )Ponnuchamy Ambalam on 31 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-10-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-05-20T06:13:59+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\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":")R.Sudalaimuthu vs )Ponnuchamy Ambalam on 31 October, 2008","datePublished":"2008-10-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-20T06:13:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008"},"wordCount":1051,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008","name":")R.Sudalaimuthu vs )Ponnuchamy Ambalam on 31 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-10-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-20T06:13:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-sudalaimuthu-vs-ponnuchamy-ambalam-on-31-october-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":")R.Sudalaimuthu vs )Ponnuchamy Ambalam on 31 October, 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\/128986","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=128986"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/128986\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=128986"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=128986"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=128986"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}