{"id":143390,"date":"2008-05-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-05-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008"},"modified":"2016-12-15T20:25:19","modified_gmt":"2016-12-15T14:55:19","slug":"hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008","title":{"rendered":"Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd vs Baby Joseph on 30 May, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd vs Baby Joseph on 30 May, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCRP.No. 293 of 2004()\n\n\n1. HINDUSTAN ORGANIC CHEMICALS LTD.\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. BABY JOSEPH, PUNNASSERY HOUSE,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.U.K.RAMAKRISHNAN (SR.)\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID\n\n Dated :30\/05\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n                           HARUN-UL-RASHID, J.\n                       ------------------------------------------\n                           C.R.P No. 293 of 2004\n                      -------------------------------------------\n                   Dated this the 30th day of May 2008\n\n                                      ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>      The revision petitioner is the requisitioning authority in the Land<\/p>\n<p>Acquisition Reference case No.117\/1982. on the file of the First additional<\/p>\n<p>sub court, Ernakulam. The revision petitioner is the second judgment<\/p>\n<p>debtor in E.P No. 355\/1998 in L.A.R. 117\/1998 This revision petition is<\/p>\n<p>filed challenging the order dated 14.10.2003 in E.A 658\/2002 ordering<\/p>\n<p>attachment, in E.P. No.355\/1988.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>      2.    According to the revision petitioner, the respondent had filed<\/p>\n<p>an execution petition earlier as E.P No. 150 of 1988 for execution of decree<\/p>\n<p>The said petition    was dismissed on 16.7.1988 on depositing of Rs.<\/p>\n<p>1,22,291\/- by the revision petitioner. The respondent subsequently filed<\/p>\n<p>another petition as E.P. No. 515 of 1991 claiming an amount of Rs.<\/p>\n<p>1,87,439.17 The petitioner filed an objection and deposited an amount of<\/p>\n<p>Rs.1,14,515\/- on 7.11.1991 The respondent though was entitled to get<\/p>\n<p>only an amount of Rs. 77,161.13, withdrew the full deposited amount The<\/p>\n<p>respondent had thus withdrawn an excess amount of Rs. 37,353.87 The<\/p>\n<p>E.P No.515 of 1991 was dismissed on 20.3.1993. The respondent on<\/p>\n<p>25.7.1998 filed yet another petition as E.P No. 355 of 1998 claiming an<\/p>\n<p>amount of Rs. 49,804.81. The revision petitioner herein filed an objection<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">C.R.P No. 293 of 2004                 -2-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>and calculation      statement stating that no amount is due to the<\/p>\n<p>respondent\/decree holder, on the other hand the respondent\/decree holder<\/p>\n<p>is liable to return to the revision petitioner the excess amount of Rs.<\/p>\n<p>37,353.87 withdrawn by him. The respondent on 21.8.2001 filed a balance<\/p>\n<p>statement showing that the balance amount due to him was Rs. 60,770\/-<\/p>\n<p>The execution court without considering the objection of the petitioner and<\/p>\n<p>without determining the amount if any, due to the respondent has ordered<\/p>\n<p>for taking further steps in the execution petition and on 24.1.2002 the court<\/p>\n<p>has ordered attachment. The petitioner therefore filed a review petition as<\/p>\n<p>E.A. 658 of 2002 praying for an order to review the attachment order dated<\/p>\n<p>24.1.2002 passed by the execution Court. Respondent filed an objection<\/p>\n<p>The execution court without considering the settled legal principles, by<\/p>\n<p>order dated 14.10.2003 held that the respondent has           filed statement<\/p>\n<p>squarely in accordance with decree and the balance amount due to<\/p>\n<p>respondent as on13.11.1991 isRs. 24,678.45 and dismissed E.A. No. 658<\/p>\n<p>of 2002.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>      3.     The revision petitioner submitted that the calculation made by<\/p>\n<p>the decree holder is wrong and it is wrongly accepted by the execution<\/p>\n<p>Court. The principles regarding the rule of appropriation and adjustment<\/p>\n<p>of amount in Land acquisition cases are well settled           by the recent<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">C.R.P No. 293 of 2004                -3-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>decisions of this Court in State of Kerala Vs. Mariamma 2005 (2) KLT<\/p>\n<p>587 and Supreme court in Gurpreet Singh Vs. Union of India 2008(1)<\/p>\n<p>KLJ 463     and therefore the correct calculation is necessitated. In case<\/p>\n<p>the revision petitioner file the correct calculation statement in accordance<\/p>\n<p>with the principles laid down in the aforesaid decisions and if it shows the<\/p>\n<p>excess amount has been deposited by him mistakenly, the respondent is<\/p>\n<p>bound to return the said excess amount.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>       4.    After considering the facts and circumstances of this case I<\/p>\n<p>am of the view that       the matter  requires    reconsideration.    Before<\/p>\n<p>considering the said questions       the execution      court shall call for<\/p>\n<p>calculation statements      from both sides. It must be prepared          in<\/p>\n<p>accordance with the principles laid down as stated above. The execution<\/p>\n<p>court shall consider this matter afresh after giving opportunity to both<\/p>\n<p>sides to substantiate their contentions. E.A. 658\/2002 filed for reviewing<\/p>\n<p>the order    of attachment     is set aside   The counsel for the revision<\/p>\n<p>petitioner drew my attention to a decision of a Division Bench of this Court<\/p>\n<p>dated 29.5.2001 in C.R.P 784\/1998 wherein it is held that the closing of<\/p>\n<p>earlier execution petition on the basis that the amount claimed by the<\/p>\n<p>decree holders and if the amount is deposited that amounts to recording<\/p>\n<p>satisfaction of the decree The said principle laid down by this Court shall<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">C.R.P No. 293 of 2004                -4-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>be considered before passing orders. The learned counsel for the revision<\/p>\n<p>petitioner submitted that even if any balance amount is due to the decree<\/p>\n<p>holder\/respondent he is not entitled to claim the said amount . Whatever<\/p>\n<p>is asked is deposited       which amounts to recording satisfaction of the<\/p>\n<p>decree The execution court is directed to consider this contention of the<\/p>\n<p>revision petitioner as well. The order shall be passed within a period of 4<\/p>\n<p>months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.<\/p>\n<p>       The impugned order is set aside.The Civil Revision petition is<\/p>\n<p>disposed of, as stated above.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>                                          HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE<\/p>\n<p>es<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd vs Baby Joseph on 30 May, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM CRP.No. 293 of 2004() 1. HINDUSTAN ORGANIC CHEMICALS LTD. &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. BABY JOSEPH, PUNNASSERY HOUSE, &#8230; Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.U.K.RAMAKRISHNAN (SR.) For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon&#8217;ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID [&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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-143390","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd vs Baby Joseph on 30 May, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd vs Baby Joseph on 30 May, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-05-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-12-15T14:55:19+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=\"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\\\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd vs Baby Joseph on 30 May, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-05-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-12-15T14:55:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008\"},\"wordCount\":757,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008\",\"name\":\"Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd vs Baby Joseph on 30 May, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-05-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-12-15T14:55:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd vs Baby Joseph on 30 May, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd vs Baby Joseph on 30 May, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd vs Baby Joseph on 30 May, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-05-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-12-15T14:55:19+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd vs Baby Joseph on 30 May, 2008","datePublished":"2008-05-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-12-15T14:55:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008"},"wordCount":757,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008","name":"Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd vs Baby Joseph on 30 May, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-05-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-12-15T14:55:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-organic-chemicals-ltd-vs-baby-joseph-on-30-may-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd vs Baby Joseph on 30 May, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143390","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=143390"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/143390\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=143390"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=143390"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=143390"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}