{"id":141785,"date":"2011-04-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-04-25T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011"},"modified":"2016-05-05T02:16:51","modified_gmt":"2016-05-04T20:46:51","slug":"lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011","title":{"rendered":"Lal Singh Rajpal vs Raj Kapil Singh &amp; Anr on 26 April, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Lal Singh Rajpal vs Raj Kapil Singh &amp; Anr on 26 April, 2011<\/div>\n<pre>IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI\n                W.P.(C) No. 5577 of 2009\n                        --------\n<\/pre>\n<pre>Lal Singh Rajpal                         ... Petitioner\n                        Versus\nRaj Kapil Singh &amp; anr.                         ...           Respondents\n                           --------\n\nCORAM:              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.PATEL\n                        --------\n\nFor the petitioner         :        Mr. Amit Kr. Das, Advocate\nFor the respondent no.1    :        Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate\n                           --------\n\nOrder No. 02: Dated 26th April, 2011\nPer D.N.Patel, J.\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>1.    The present writ petition has been preferred against an order, passed by the<br \/>\nlearned Additional District Judge, Fast Tack Court No. I, Dhanbad, dated 9th<br \/>\nNovember, 2009 in Title Appeal No. 33 of 2007, whereby, the application<br \/>\npreferred by the present petitioner (appellant in Title Appeal No. 33 of 2007) for<br \/>\ngiving Exhibit number to a document, which is rent agreement and which was<br \/>\npresented by the original defendant in Title (Eviction) Suit No. 13 of 2004, has<br \/>\nbeen rejected.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.    I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, who has submitted that as<br \/>\nper the order passed by the lower appellate court dated 25th July, 2008, both the<br \/>\nparties are admitting the said document and, as such, the application preferred by<br \/>\nthe present petitioner, who is appellant in Title Appeal No. 33 of 2007, ought to<br \/>\nhave been allowed and the rent agreement, presented by the original defendant in<br \/>\nTitle (Eviction) Suit No. 13 of 2004, ought to have been given Exhibit number<br \/>\nand whatever may be the objection of the respondent in Title Appeal No. 33 of<br \/>\n2007 would have been considered by the learned lower appellate court at the time<br \/>\nof final hearing of Title Appeal No. 33 of 2007. Learned counsel for petitioner has<br \/>\nrelied upon a decision rendered by the Hon&#8217;ble Apex Court in the case of Bipin<br \/>\nShantilal Panchal Vs. State of Gujarat &amp; anr., as reported in (2001)3 SCC 1.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.    Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the document, in<br \/>\nquestion, cannot be given Exhibit number, because a secondary evidence, which is<br \/>\nnot a original one being photo copy of the land agreement, cannot be given<br \/>\nExhibit number and that too at a belated stage and, therefore, rightly it has been<br \/>\nmarked &#8216;X&#8217; for identification and has been kept for hearing along with Title<br \/>\nAppeal No. 33 of 2007.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                    2.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>4.    Having herd learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and<br \/>\ncircumstances of the case, I hereby quash and set aside the impugned order dated<br \/>\n9th November, 2009, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, F.T.C.-I,<br \/>\nDhanbad, in Title Appeal No. 33 of 2007, mainly for the following facts and<br \/>\nreasons:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>             (I)     The present petitioner was the original plaintiff, who had<br \/>\n      instituted Title (Eviction) Suit No. 13 of 2004 before the trial court. The<br \/>\n      said suit was dismissed and the Title Appeal No. 33 of 2007 has been<br \/>\n      instituted by the original plaintiff\/petitioner.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>             (II)    It appears that the rent agreement, entered into between the<br \/>\n      parties to the suit, was already presented by the original defendant in Title<br \/>\n      (Eviction) Suit No. 13 of 2004. The defendant&#8217;s witness no.1 has also<br \/>\n      referred the said rent agreement in his deposition. Thus, the said rent<br \/>\n      agreement ought to have been given Exhibit number, but the learned<br \/>\n      appellate court has not given Exhibit number to it and, therefore, the need<br \/>\n      arose for the present petitioner\/appellant to prefer an application to given<br \/>\n      Exhibit number to a rent agreement, which was presented by the defendant<br \/>\n      and referred to by the defendant&#8217;s witness no.1 in his deposition.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>             (III)   Looking to the nature of the document, it appears that the said<br \/>\n      document ought to have been given Exhibit number, as it affects the very<br \/>\n      root of the case. It appears that there are some objections for grant of<br \/>\n      Exhibit number to the said document by the original defendant or the<br \/>\n      present respondent.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>             (IV)    It has been held by the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court in the case of<br \/>\n      Bipin Shantilal Panchal Vs. State of Gujarat &amp; anr., as reported in<br \/>\n      (2001)3 SCC 1, paragraph nos. 13 and 14 whereof, reads as under:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>             &#8220;13. It is an archaic practice that during the evidence-collecting<br \/>\n             stage, whenever any objection is raised regarding admissibility of any<br \/>\n             material in evidence the court does not proceed further without<br \/>\n             passing order on such objection. But the fallout of the above practice<br \/>\n             is that: Suppose the trial court, in a case, upholds a particular<br \/>\n             objection and excludes the material from being admitted in evidence<br \/>\n             and then proceeds with the trial and disposes of the case finally. If the<br \/>\n             appellate or the revisional court, when the same question is re-<br \/>\n             canvassed, could take a different view on the admissibility of that<br \/>\n             material in such cases the appellate court would be deprived of the<br \/>\n             benefit of that evidence, because that was not put on record by the trial<br \/>\n             court. In such a situation the higher court may have to send the case<br \/>\n             back to the trial court for recording that evidence and then to dispose<br \/>\n             of the case afresh. Why should the trial prolong like that unnecessarily<br \/>\n             on account of practices created by ourselves. Such practices, when<br \/>\n             realised through the course of long period to be hindrances which<br \/>\n             impede steady and swift progress of trial proceedings, must bed recast<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                            3.<\/span><br \/>\n             or remoulded to give way for better substitutes which would help<br \/>\n             acceleration of trial proceedings.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>             14.      When so recast, the practice which can be a better substitute is<br \/>\n             this: Whenever an objection is raised during evidence-taking stage<br \/>\n             regarding the admissibility of any material or item of oral evidence the<br \/>\n             trial court can make a note of such objection and mark the objected<br \/>\n             document tentatively as an exhibit in the case (or record the objected<br \/>\n             part of the oral evidence) subject to such objections to be decided at<br \/>\n             the last stage in the final judgment. If the court finds at the final stage<br \/>\n             that the objection so raised is sustainable the Judge or Magistrate can<br \/>\n             keep such evidence excluded from consideration. In our view there is<br \/>\n             no illegality in adopting such a course. (However, we make it clear<br \/>\n             that if the objection relates to deficiency of stamp duty of a document<br \/>\n             the court has to decide the objection before proceeding further. For all<br \/>\n             other objections the procedure suggested above can be followed.)&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                                                           (Emphasis Supplied)<br \/>\n             Thus, whenever there is any objection raised by any of the parties<br \/>\n      for grant of Exhibit number, it has been provided by the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme<br \/>\n      Court that the document ought to be given Exhibit number by recording the<br \/>\n      objections and the objections are to be considered at the time of final<br \/>\n      hearing of the proceeding.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>             (V)    In view of the aforesaid decision, an error apparent on the<br \/>\n      face of the record has been committed by the learned lower appellate court.<br \/>\n      The document ought to have been given the Exhibit number, objections<br \/>\n      raised by the original defendant or the respondent in Title Appeal No. 33 of<br \/>\n      2007 ought to have been recorded and considered by the lower appellate<br \/>\n      court at the time of final hearing of Title Appeal No. 33 of 2007.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>             (VI)   One thing ought to have been kept in mind by the lower<br \/>\n      appellate court that giving Exhibit mark\/number to a document does not<br \/>\n      amount that the said document becomes a conclusive piece of evidence.<br \/>\n      The evidenciary value of        a document depends upon the totality of the<br \/>\n      evidences on record and it may happen that a document, which is given<br \/>\n      Exhibit number, may not have any evidenciary value, looking to the other<br \/>\n      evidences on record, adduced by the parties to the litigation and, therefore,<br \/>\n      Exhibit number ought to have been given to the rent agreement, as stated<br \/>\n      by the petitioner before the lower appellate court by adopting the method,<br \/>\n      which has been suggested in the aforesaid paragraphs of the decision,<br \/>\n      rendered by the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>5.    As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid facts, reasons and judicial<br \/>\npronouncement, I hereby quash and set aside the order dated 9th November, 2009,<br \/>\npassed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No. I, Dhanbad,<br \/>\nin Title Appeal No. 33 of 2007 and I hereby direct the lower appellate court to<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                4.<\/span><br \/>\n             give Exhibit number to the rent agreement, presented by the original defendant,<br \/>\n             and the objections raised by the original defendant\/respondent in Title Appeal No.<br \/>\n             33 of 2007 will be considered at the time of final hearing of the Title Appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>             6.    This writ petition is, accordingly, allowed and disposed of.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                                            ( D.N. Patel, J. )<br \/>\nA.K.Verma\/\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jharkhand High Court Lal Singh Rajpal vs Raj Kapil Singh &amp; Anr on 26 April, 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 5577 of 2009 &#8212;&#8212;&#8211; Lal Singh Rajpal &#8230; Petitioner Versus Raj Kapil Singh &amp; anr. &#8230; Respondents &#8212;&#8212;&#8211; CORAM: HON&#8217;BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.PATEL &#8212;&#8212;&#8211; For the petitioner : Mr. [&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-141785","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>Lal Singh Rajpal vs Raj Kapil Singh &amp; Anr on 26 April, 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\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Lal Singh Rajpal vs Raj Kapil Singh &amp; Anr on 26 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-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=\"2011-04-25T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-04T20:46:51+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Lal Singh Rajpal vs Raj Kapil Singh &amp; Anr on 26 April, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-04-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-04T20:46:51+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1329,\"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\\\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011\",\"name\":\"Lal Singh Rajpal vs Raj Kapil Singh &amp; Anr on 26 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-04-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-04T20:46:51+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Lal Singh Rajpal vs Raj Kapil Singh &amp; Anr on 26 April, 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":"Lal Singh Rajpal vs Raj Kapil Singh &amp; Anr on 26 April, 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\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Lal Singh Rajpal vs Raj Kapil Singh &amp; Anr on 26 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-04-25T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-04T20:46:51+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Lal Singh Rajpal vs Raj Kapil Singh &amp; Anr on 26 April, 2011","datePublished":"2011-04-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-04T20:46:51+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011"},"wordCount":1329,"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\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011","name":"Lal Singh Rajpal vs Raj Kapil Singh &amp; Anr on 26 April, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-04-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-04T20:46:51+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lal-singh-rajpal-vs-raj-kapil-singh-anr-on-26-april-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Lal Singh Rajpal vs Raj Kapil Singh &amp; Anr on 26 April, 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\/141785","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=141785"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/141785\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=141785"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=141785"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=141785"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}