{"id":130305,"date":"2008-08-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008"},"modified":"2017-02-16T14:20:19","modified_gmt":"2017-02-16T08:50:19","slug":"wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"Wallace vs Cadila on 4 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Wallace vs Cadila on 4 August, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: K.M.Thaker,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   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\nCA\/8960\/2008\t 6\/ 6\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCIVIL\nAPPLICATION  No. 8960 of 2008\n \n\nIn\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 8009 of 2008\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\n \n=========================================\n\n\n \n\nWALLACE\nPHARMACEUTICALS PVT LTD - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nCADILA\nHEALTHCARE LTD & 1 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================\n \nAppearance : \nMR\nSAURABHY SOPARKAR, SR. COUNSEL WITH MR. JATIN TRIVEDI, MR. HARSHIT\nTOLIA, MR. TEJAS TRIVEDI FOR  YJ TRIVEDI for\nAPPLICANT (s) : 1, \nMR MIHIR THAKORE SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SINGHI &\nCO for Respondent(s) : 1, \nNone for Respondent(s) :\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 K.M.THAKER\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n\t\t\t\t\tDate\n: 04\/08\/2008 \n\n \n\nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n
1.\tThis
\napplication is preferred with below mentioned prayers:\n<\/p>\n
(A)\tYOUR
\nLORDSHIPS be pleased to recall the orders dated 06.06.2008 and
\n13.06.2008 passed by this Hon’ble Court in Special Civil Application
\nNo.8009 of 2008 and pass suitable orders, in the interest of justice.\n<\/p>\n
(B)\tYOUR
\nLORDSHIPS be pleased to pass appropriate orders initiating
\nproceedings of perjury\/giving false evidence\/making false statement
\nand prosecute the opponent No.1 – petitioner company and\/or its
\nresponsible officers in accordance with law, in the interest of
\njustice.\n<\/p>\n
(C)\tYOUR
\nLORDSHIPS be pleased to stay the orders dated 06.06.2008 and
\n13.06.2008 passed by this Hon’ble Court in Special Civil Application
\nNo.8009\/2008, pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of
\nthis application, in the interest of jusstice;\n<\/p>\n
(D)\tYOUR
\nLORDSHIPS be pleased to grant such other and further reliefs, as may
\nbe deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court, in the interest of justice;\n<\/p>\n
2.\tIt
\nappears from the aforesaid prayers and the averments made in the
\napplication that the applicant has approached this Court on the
\nground that the opponent i.e. original petitioner did not place
\ncorrect and complete facts before the Court, when the order dated
\n6.6.2008 and subsequent order dated 13.6.2008 came to be passed. It
\nalso appears to be the case of the applicant that the product in
\nquestion in main petition i.e. Special Civil Application No.8009 of
\n2008 is different from what is mentioned in the order dated 6.6.2008.
\nThe applicant has also claimed that on 4.6.2008, the applicant was
\npresent before the trial Court, however, the opponent i.e. original
\npetitioner represented before the Court on 5.6.2008 as well as
\n6.6.2008 that the appearance on behalf of the applicant was not
\nentered. On the basis of such averments and allegations, present
\napplication has been preferred.\n<\/p>\n
3.\tMr.\n<\/p>\n
Soparkar, learned Senior Counsel appears on behalf of the applicant
\nand he, during his submission, reiterated the said details and
\nsubmitted that the original petitioner did not put correct and
\ncomplete facts before the Court when the order dated 6.6.2008 and
\n13.6.2008 came to be passed. He also submitted that in view of the
\norder dated 6.6.2008, it is being insisted before the learned trial
\nCourt by the original petitioner that since the High Court has
\ngranted injunction, the same should be continued. When with reference
\nto the said submission, the Court pointed out that the said order
\ndated 6.6.2008 and extended by order dated 13.6.2008 has already come
\nto an end, Mr. Soparkar, learned Senior Counsel submitted that the
\nneed for preferring this application is on account of the fact that
\noriginal petitioner is, even after expiry of the said order,
\nrepresenting before the trial Court that in view of the order passed
\nby the High Court, the interim relief should be granted in the suit
\nalso.\n<\/p>\n
4.\tMr.\n<\/p>\n
Thakor, learned Senior Counsel appears fro the opponent. He denied
\nthe allegations and submitted that the applicant has no basis for
\nsuch apprehension and it is wholly unjustified. In view of the facts,
\nthis Court is of the view that the apprehension of the applicant is
\nunwarranted. The scope and the purport of the order dated 6.6.2008
\nis not what the opponent, as per learned Senior Counsel Mr.
\nSoparkar’s submission, is trying to portray. The said order is very
\nclear and specific on this Count.\n<\/p>\n
5.\tSo
\nfar as the aspect of the different product is concerned, the original
\npetitioner had, by circulating the Speaking to Minutes on 7.7.2008,
\nrequested for modification or correction of the error and by order
\ndated 7.7.2008, necessary corrections were directed. Accordingly, by
\norder dated 7.7.2008, earlier order dated 6.6.2008 has been corrected
\nso far as the product in question is concerned.\n<\/p>\n
6.\tAs
\nregards apprehension of the applicant, it is required to be mentioned
\nthat in the order dated 6.6.2008, this Court has expressly stated
\nthat the learned trial Court would hear and decide the interim relief
\napplication on its own merits. The said aspect is clear from the
\nsub-para (c) of the order dated 6.6.2008, which, for ready reference,
\nis reproduced below.\n<\/p>\n
(c)\tIt
\nwould be open for the respondent to immediately enter appearance and
\nrequest the learned trial Court to take up the interim relief
\napplication for hearing and pass necessary orders after hearing the
\nrespondent and after making such a request before the learned trial
\nCourt, the respondent may approach  this Court to  vacate  or  modify
\n the  present  order in case of need.  The  learned  trial  Court
\nwill  hear and decide the  present  petitioner’s  interim application
\non its merits and without being influenced in any manner by this
\norder or by the fact that this Court has granted the aforesaid
\nad-interim relief.  The learned trial Court shall consider all
\nthe details and all the aspects of the matter as well as the
\nobjections and reply of the defendant if the same is placed on
\nrecord, while passing an order on interim relief application.  The
\ninterim relief application shall be decided  independently and on
\nmerits by the learned trial Court.\n<\/p>\n
7.\tThus,
\nthe apprehension of the applicant is ill-founded in light of what is
\nclarified by this Court in aforesaid paragraph. However, so as to
\nallay the apprehension of the applicant and to clarify the situation
\nfor the benefit of the trial Court as well as for the petitioner, it
\nis again clarified that the learned trial Court shall hear and decide
\nthe application Exhibit 5, Exhibit 14 or any other applications,
\nindependently on their own merits and without being influenced in any
\nmanner by orders dated 6.6.2008 and\/or dated 13.6.2008 and\/or even
\nwithout being influenced by the fact that this Court had passed the
\nstay order dated 6.6.2008. It is also clarified that the learned
\ntrial Court shall consider all details and all aspects of the matter
\nindependently on its own merits.\n<\/p>\n
8.\tMr.\n<\/p>\n
Soparkar, learned Senior Counsel during his submission, stated that
\nthe said clarification would serve the purpose of the applicant and
\napplicant does not pray for any other relief in the application and
\nthe clarification would help the applicant and the application may be
\ndisposed of with the said clarification. Hence, with the aforesaid
\nclarifications, the application is disposed of. Direct service is
\npermitted.\n<\/p>\n
(K.M.THAKER,
\nJ.)<\/p>\n
ynvyas<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Wallace vs Cadila on 4 August, 2008 Author: K.M.Thaker,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CA\/8960\/2008 6\/ 6 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8960 of 2008 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8009 of 2008 ========================================= WALLACE PHARMACEUTICALS PVT LTD – Petitioner(s) Versus CADILA HEALTHCARE […]<\/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-130305","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nWallace vs Cadila on 4 August, 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\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Wallace vs Cadila on 4 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-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=\"2008-08-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-02-16T08:50:19+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\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Wallace vs Cadila on 4 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-16T08:50:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1030,\"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\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008\",\"name\":\"Wallace vs Cadila on 4 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-16T08:50:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Wallace vs Cadila on 4 August, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Wallace vs Cadila on 4 August, 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\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Wallace vs Cadila on 4 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-02-16T08:50:19+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\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Wallace vs Cadila on 4 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-16T08:50:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008"},"wordCount":1030,"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\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008","name":"Wallace vs Cadila on 4 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-16T08:50:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wallace-vs-cadila-on-4-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Wallace vs Cadila on 4 August, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/130305","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=130305"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/130305\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=130305"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=130305"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=130305"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}