{"id":132077,"date":"2009-03-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009"},"modified":"2015-09-03T02:13:23","modified_gmt":"2015-09-02T20:43:23","slug":"amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"Amulya Lakra vs Tarcius Tette &amp; Ors. on 24 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Amulya Lakra vs Tarcius Tette &amp; Ors. on 24 March, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI\n                              S.A. No. 262 of 2004\n                                                   ............\n                Amulya Lakra                          ........Appellant\n                                           Versus\n                Tarcius Tette &amp; Others                .........Respondents\n\n                       CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. MERATHIA\n\n                For the Appellant           : Mr. Manoj Tandon, Advocate\n                                            -------\n                C.A.V. On 4.3.2009                       Delivered on 24\/03\/2009\n\n4\/24 \/03\/2009                 This appeal has been filed against the judgement and decree dated\n                31.1.2004<\/pre>\n<p>, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Simdega in Title Appeal<br \/>\n                No. 4 of 1995 affirming the judgment and decree dated 26.11.1994, passed by<br \/>\n                learned Munsif, Simdega in Title Suit No. 33\/85.\n<\/p>\n<p>                2.            Mr. Tandon, appearing for the appellant, submitted that the written<br \/>\n                statement filed by the vendor of the parties on 12.12.1989 was wrongly ignored<br \/>\n                by the learned courts below; that P.W.D. should have been made party and that<br \/>\n                the plaintiff-respondent could have filed suit for declaration that the sale deed<br \/>\n                dated 7.7.1980 executed in favour of the appellant was invalid but such suit<br \/>\n                would have been barred by limitation.\n<\/p>\n<p>                3.            The said submissions of Mr. Tandon cannto be accepted for the<br \/>\n                following reasons. The plaintiff-respondent no. 1 filed this suit for declaration of<br \/>\n                his possession over the suit land described in the scheduled of the plaint and for<br \/>\n                further declaration that the possession of defendant no. 1-appellant, over 5<br \/>\n                decimals of the suit lands was illegal and therefore defendant no. 1 should be<br \/>\n                removed from 5 decimals of land. The plaintiff further prayed for issuance of<br \/>\n                permanent injunction etc. with regard to the said encroached land.\n<\/p>\n<p>                4.            After considering the pleadings and the evidences on record, the<br \/>\n                trial court found that the plaintiff in paragraphs 2 and 4 of the plaint stated that<br \/>\n                P.W.D. acquired 25 decimals of land, out of plot no. 588, which position was<br \/>\n                admitted by the vendor of the parties-defendant no. 2 in his first written<br \/>\n                statement filed on 26.8.1986 vide para 2, but in the subsequent written statement<br \/>\n                filed on 12.12.1989 the said vendor denied acquisition of any area of land by<br \/>\n                P.W.D. out of plot no. 588. The subsequent written statement was rightly ignored<br \/>\n                by the trial court as no ground was made out for filing the same and it was filed<br \/>\n                without court&#8217;s permission. Moreover, it was contrary to the written statement<br \/>\n                filed by the defendant no. 1-appellant, in which he said that only 23 decimals of<br \/>\n                land were acquired by P.W.D. The trial court also rightly held that it was for<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                    2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>          defendant no. 1-appellant to establish that only 23 decimals of land were<br \/>\n          acquired by P.W.D. as asserted by him but he failed to discharge such onus. It<br \/>\n          was found that all the parties admitted that the lands were acquired by the<br \/>\n          P.W.D. It was then rightly held that 25 decimals of land were acquired by the<br \/>\n          P.W.D. In such circumstances, the suit could not fail due to non-impleadment of<br \/>\n          P.W.D. as party.\n<\/p>\n<p>          5.            It was further found that Ext-1, the sale deed under which the<br \/>\n          plaintiff-respondent no. 1 purchased a portion of plot no. 588, clearly mentioned<br \/>\n          the boundary and other description of the purchased land but in the subsequent<br \/>\n          sale deed ( Ext-A) made in favour of the appellant by the same vendor, no<br \/>\n          boundary of the land purchased was given. It is true that there is some mistake<br \/>\n          in paragraph 11 of the trial court judgment with regard to calculation of land but<br \/>\n          the same are typographical and inconsequential so far as the dispute regarding<br \/>\n          encroachment over 5 decimals is concerned. It was rightly found that the vendor-<br \/>\n          defendant no. 2 admitted the plaintiff&#8217;s statement that the appellant had<br \/>\n          encroached upon 5 decimals of land belonging to the plaintiff. The trial court<br \/>\n          accordingly decreed the suit.\n<\/p>\n<p>          6.            The appellant filed appeal. The lower appellate court considered<br \/>\n          the respective cases of the parties and the evidences brought on the record. The<br \/>\n          lower appellate court affirmed the findings of the trial court. It also found that in<br \/>\n          the sale deed ( Ext-1) full description of the lands purchased with boundary from<br \/>\n          all side was given; and that the case of the plaintiff found support from the<br \/>\n          evidence of P.W-4-the Pleader Commissioner and his report-Ext-4, whereas no<br \/>\n          boundary was mentioned in the sale deed of the appellant. In view of the nature<br \/>\n          of controversies between the parties, it was not necessary for the plaintiff-<br \/>\n          appellant to challenge the sale deed-Ext.-A, under which the appellant<br \/>\n          purchased land from the vendor of the plaintiff. The suit involved the dispute<br \/>\n          with regard to encroachment over 5 decimals of land only.\n<\/p>\n<p>          7.            No grounds have been made out for interfering with the concurrent<br \/>\n          findings of facts, noticed above. No substantial question of law is involved. This<br \/>\n          Second Appeal is accordingly dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                                  ( R.K. Merathia, J)<\/p>\n<p>Rakesh\/\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jharkhand High Court Amulya Lakra vs Tarcius Tette &amp; Ors. on 24 March, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI S.A. No. 262 of 2004 &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; Amulya Lakra &#8230;&#8230;..Appellant Versus Tarcius Tette &amp; Others &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;Respondents CORAM: THE HON&#8217;BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. MERATHIA For the Appellant : Mr. Manoj Tandon, Advocate &#8212;&#8212;- C.A.V. On [&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":[8,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-132077","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jharkhand-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Amulya Lakra vs Tarcius Tette &amp; Ors. on 24 March, 2009 - 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\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Amulya Lakra vs Tarcius Tette &amp; Ors. on 24 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-03-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-09-02T20:43:23+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=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Amulya Lakra vs Tarcius Tette &amp; Ors. on 24 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-02T20:43:23+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":726,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jharkhand High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009\",\"name\":\"Amulya Lakra vs Tarcius Tette &amp; Ors. on 24 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-02T20:43:23+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Amulya Lakra vs Tarcius Tette &amp; Ors. on 24 March, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Amulya Lakra vs Tarcius Tette &amp; Ors. on 24 March, 2009 - 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\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Amulya Lakra vs Tarcius Tette &amp; Ors. on 24 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-09-02T20:43:23+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Amulya Lakra vs Tarcius Tette &amp; Ors. on 24 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-02T20:43:23+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009"},"wordCount":726,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jharkhand High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009","name":"Amulya Lakra vs Tarcius Tette &amp; Ors. on 24 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-02T20:43:23+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amulya-lakra-vs-tarcius-tette-ors-on-24-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Amulya Lakra vs Tarcius Tette &amp; Ors. on 24 March, 2009"}]},{"@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\/132077","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=132077"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132077\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=132077"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=132077"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=132077"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}