{"id":132498,"date":"2011-07-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-07-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011"},"modified":"2017-05-17T02:50:49","modified_gmt":"2017-05-16T21:20:49","slug":"ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011","title":{"rendered":"M\/S vs Ramky on 15 July, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M\/S vs Ramky on 15 July, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Akil Kureshi,<\/div>\n<pre>  \n Gujarat High Court Case Information System \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\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nIAAP\/21\/2011\t 5\/ 5\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nPETN.\nUNDER ARBITRATION ACT No. 21 of 2011\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nPETN.\nUNDER ARBITRATION ACT No. 22 of 2011\n \n\nTo\n\n\n \n\nPETN.\nUNDER ARBITRATION ACT No. 24 of 2011\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\nM\/S\nH P ZALA THRO.NATWARSINHJI H ZALA - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nRAMKY\nINFRASTRUCTURE LTD THRO.CHAIRMAN\/ MANAGING &amp; 1 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n========================================================= \nAppearance\n: \nMRCHIRAGBPATEL for\nPetitioner(s) : 1, \nMR SS BELSARE for Respondent(s) : 1 -\n2. \nMR.VIJAY B SETH for Respondent(s) : 1 -\n2. \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 AKIL KURESHI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 15\/07\/2011 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>These<br \/>\n\tapplications have been filed seeking appointment of Arbitrator under<br \/>\n\tSection 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (the Act) in<br \/>\n\tfollowing background.\n<\/p>\n<p>Since<br \/>\n\tfacts are similar in all cases, it may be noted from those arising<br \/>\n\tfrom Arbitration Petition No.21 of 2011. Petitioner had agreed to<br \/>\n\tundertake certain work on behalf of the respondent under an<br \/>\n\tagreement pursuant to which Work Order was issued on or around<br \/>\n\t1.1.2009. The parties agreed to set of conditions titled as &#8220;General<br \/>\n\tTerms and Conditions For Piece Rate Workers&#8221;. In addition<br \/>\n\tthereto, there was a separate terms of agreement titled as &#8216;Special<br \/>\n\tConditions of Contract&#8217; also signed by the parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>Clause<br \/>\n\tNo.4 of the Special Conditions of Contract provided as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;4.\tAny<br \/>\ndispute arising in regard to the work in the site will be settled by<br \/>\nmutual discussions with the Engineers in charge of both RIL and<br \/>\nyourself. On failure of settlement of any such dispute will be<br \/>\nfinally settled under the Jurisdiction Courts at Ahmedabad, Gujarat&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tClause 37 of the &#8216;General Terms and Conditions of Piece Rate<br \/>\n\tWorkers&#8217;, there was a reference to certain nature of disputes being<br \/>\n\tresolved through mode of arbitration.\n<\/p>\n<p>Clause<br \/>\n\tNo.37 reads as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;37.\tIn case<br \/>\nof any disputes regarding meaning and intent of any specifications,<br \/>\nterms and conditions etc. the same shall be referred to the Managing<br \/>\nDirector of M\/s.Ramky Infrastructure Ltd. whose decision shall be<br \/>\nfinal and binding on both the parties&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>During<br \/>\n\texecution of the work by the petitioner for the respondent, several<br \/>\n\tdisputes arose. Petitioner vide communication dated 10.10.2010<br \/>\n\traised number of issues demanding total Compensation of<br \/>\n\tRs.52,10,083\/- with interest from the respondent. Since there was no<br \/>\n\tresponse to the demand notice dated 10.10.2010, petitioner sent yet<br \/>\n\tanother letter dated 2.2.2011 to the Managing Director of the<br \/>\n\trespondent-Company and stated that:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;4.\tWe<br \/>\n\tsubmit that due to the above position being now created and you are<br \/>\n\tnow requested to look into the matter that the same are settled and<br \/>\n\tpaid to us For the purpose of settlement you are requested to hold<br \/>\n\tthe meeting for resolving the difference between the parties and in<br \/>\n\tdoing so, we will be highly obliged&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>Treating<br \/>\n\tthe said notice dated 2nd February, 2011 as a notice for<br \/>\n\tappointment of arbitrator on the premise that Clause 37 of the<br \/>\n\tContract makes dispute between the parties compulsorily arbitrable,<br \/>\n\tthe petitioner has moved present petitions seeking appointment of<br \/>\n\tarbitrator. In response to the notice, respondent has filed reply<br \/>\n\tprimarily contending that Clause 37 of the contract pertained to<br \/>\n\tlimited nature of disputes and disputes raised by the petitioner in<br \/>\n\tthe two notices would not be covered by clause-37.\n<\/p>\n<p>Having<br \/>\n\theard learned counsel for the parties. At the outset, I may notice<br \/>\n\tthat there was no notice for appointment of arbitrator by the<br \/>\n\tpetitioner issued to the respondent. Counsel for the petitioner,<br \/>\n\thowever, submitted that the communication dated 2.2.2011 should be<br \/>\n\ttreated as one seeking reference to the arbitrator since it was<br \/>\n\taddressed to the Managing Director who under clause 37 was to<br \/>\n\tarbitrate the disputes between the parties. I am unable to agree to<br \/>\n\tsuch a contention. In the notice, there is no mention that the<br \/>\n\tManaging Director should resolve the disputes through arbitration.\n<\/p>\n<p>Even<br \/>\n\tif one were to accept such a contention, I do not find that present<br \/>\n\tapplication for appointment of the arbitrator can be accepted. This<br \/>\n\tis in view of my reading of Clause 37 of the contract and the nature<br \/>\n\tof disputes, the petitioner seeks arbitration of.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\this demand notice dated 10.10.2010, the petitioner had raised<br \/>\n\tdisputes with respect to different nature of works undertaken by the<br \/>\n\tpetitioner for and on behalf of the respondent. For example, it is<br \/>\n\talleged that pipeline, alignment etc. were not made available, that<br \/>\n\tlogistics were not provided in time and such similar other disputes.<br \/>\n\tPrimarily on this basis, the petitioner contended that it&#8217;s<br \/>\n\tmachinery remained idle for long time which loss should be<br \/>\n\tcompensated.\n<\/p>\n<p>With<br \/>\n\tthis brief familiarity of the nature of disputes, if one peruses<br \/>\n\tclosely the clause No.37 of the agreement, it would appear that<br \/>\n\tclause No.37 pertains only to disputes regarding meaning and intent<br \/>\n\tof any specifications, terms and conditions, etc. For obvious<br \/>\n\treasons, disputes noted above do not pertain either to meaning,<br \/>\n\tintent of any specifications or the terms and conditions of the<br \/>\n\tcontract.\n<\/p>\n<p>Counsel<br \/>\n\tfor the petitioner, however, put much stress on the expression<br \/>\n\t&#8216;etc.&#8217; part of this clause. To my mind, same must be understood as<br \/>\n\tto include items similar to the ones preceding the word etc. and not<br \/>\n\tto unrelated issues. The concept of a reading clause ejusdem<br \/>\n\tgeneris is well known in legal jurisprudence.\n<\/p>\n<p>Counsel<br \/>\n\tfor the petitioner, however, submitted that respondent did not raise<br \/>\n\tsuch a contention in response to notice dated 2.2.2011. That by<br \/>\n\titself would not mean that arbitrator under Section 11 should be<br \/>\n\tappointed despite objection from the respondent and despite finding<br \/>\n\tthat there is no provision in the agreement between the parties<br \/>\n\trequiring that disputes to be referred for arbitration instead of<br \/>\n\tresorting Court proceedings. Facts in other cases are similar and<br \/>\n\tnot necessary to record them separately.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tthe result, all applications are dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>(AKIL<br \/>\nKURESHI, J.)<\/p>\n<p>(ashish)<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court M\/S vs Ramky on 15 July, 2011 Author: Akil Kureshi, Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print IAAP\/21\/2011 5\/ 5 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD PETN. UNDER ARBITRATION ACT No. 21 of 2011 With PETN. UNDER ARBITRATION ACT No. 22 of 2011 To PETN. UNDER ARBITRATION ACT No. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-132498","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>M\/S vs Ramky on 15 July, 2011 - 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\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S vs Ramky on 15 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-05-16T21:20:49+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S vs Ramky on 15 July, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-16T21:20:49+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011\"},\"wordCount\":868,\"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\\\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S vs Ramky on 15 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-16T21:20:49+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S vs Ramky on 15 July, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"M\/S vs Ramky on 15 July, 2011 - 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\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S vs Ramky on 15 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-05-16T21:20:49+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S vs Ramky on 15 July, 2011","datePublished":"2011-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-16T21:20:49+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011"},"wordCount":868,"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\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011","name":"M\/S vs Ramky on 15 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-16T21:20:49+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-ramky-on-15-july-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S vs Ramky on 15 July, 2011"}]},{"@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\/132498","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=132498"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132498\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=132498"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=132498"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=132498"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}