{"id":153295,"date":"2009-10-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009"},"modified":"2016-05-24T09:09:19","modified_gmt":"2016-05-24T03:39:19","slug":"muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"Muhammed Shafi vs Nadiya on 13 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Muhammed Shafi vs Nadiya on 13 October, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nMat.Appeal.No. 769 of 2009()\n\n\n1. MUHAMMED SHAFI,AGED 30 YEARS,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. NADIYA, AGED 23 YEARS,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. FATHIMA SHERIN (MINOR),\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT\nThe Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI\n\n Dated :13\/10\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n<p>                 R.BASANT &amp; M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.\n<\/p>\n<p>                      &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;<br \/>\n                   C.M.Appl.No.2810 of 2009 &amp;<br \/>\n                   Mat.Appeal No.769 of 2009\n<\/p>\n<p>                     &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-<br \/>\n              Dated this the 13th day of October, 2009<\/p>\n<p>                        ORDER\/JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>BASANT, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>     This application is to condone the delay of 566 days in filing<\/p>\n<p>a Matrimonial Appeal, which appeal in turn challenges an order<\/p>\n<p>directing the appellant to pay an amount of Rs.3,20,000\/- being<\/p>\n<p>the treatment and transportation expenses along with interest<\/p>\n<p>for his minor daughter aged 2 years.\n<\/p>\n<p>     2.     The delay is gross and we are not satisfied that<\/p>\n<p>sufficient reasons have been shown to justify the prayer for<\/p>\n<p>condonation of delay. According to the appellant, he was under<\/p>\n<p>the impression that his former counsel shall file the appeal. To<\/p>\n<p>say the least, the reason stated does not at all satisfy us as<\/p>\n<p>sufficient to condone the long and inordinate delay of 566 days.<\/p>\n<p>     3.     In our anxiety to satisfy ourselves that the refusal to<\/p>\n<p>condone the delay does not result in failure or miscarriage of<\/p>\n<p>justice, we requested the learned counsel for the appellant to<\/p>\n<p>explain the nature of the challenge which he wants to mount<\/p>\n<p>against the impugned order. The claim is for an amount of Rs.3<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">Mat.Appeal No.769 of 2009      2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>lakhs incurred for the treatment of the minor daughter of the<\/p>\n<p>appellant   and   an   amount   of  Rs.20,000\/-  incurred   as<\/p>\n<p>transportation expenses.\n<\/p>\n<p>     4.   Paternity is admitted.   That the child was sick is<\/p>\n<p>admitted.   That the child had undergone treatment including<\/p>\n<p>surgery at Sree Chithira Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram is also<\/p>\n<p>admitted. That the expenditure claimed has been incurred for<\/p>\n<p>treatment is also not disputed.     His ability to meet the<\/p>\n<p>expenditure is not disputed.\n<\/p>\n<p>     5.   What then is the dispute ? The appellant took up a<\/p>\n<p>contention that the expenses were incurred and it was he who<\/p>\n<p>incurred such expenditure and discharged the liability.    The<\/p>\n<p>dispute fell in this very narrow compass.   PWs 1 to 3 were<\/p>\n<p>examined on the side of the claimant and Exts.A1 and A2 series<\/p>\n<p>were marked. On the side of the appellant, he examined himself<\/p>\n<p>as RW1 and proved Exts.B1 to B5.      Ext.X1 series were also<\/p>\n<p>marked.\n<\/p>\n<p>     6.   The court below came to the conclusion that expenses<\/p>\n<p>were incurred as claimed by the claimants and that the amounts<\/p>\n<p>were paid by the claimants and not by the appellant herein. On<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">Mat.Appeal No.769 of 2009       3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>that finding, the court below proceeded to pass the impugned<\/p>\n<p>order.\n<\/p>\n<p>     7.   The court below has considered the question in detail.<\/p>\n<p>There was significant and total absence of evidence in support of<\/p>\n<p>the assertions of the appellant that it was he who met the<\/p>\n<p>expenditure for treatment. Of course, certain bills (originals) for<\/p>\n<p>expenditure were produced by the appellant. But those amounts<\/p>\n<p>are admittedly not claimed by the claimants in the proceedings<\/p>\n<p>before the court below. In the total absence of any evidence, the<\/p>\n<p>only possible conclusion that the court could have reached is<\/p>\n<p>that the expenses covered by Ext.A1 series were all incurred by<\/p>\n<p>the claimants and such liability was not discharged by the<\/p>\n<p>appellant. Thus we find that the Family Court has not committed<\/p>\n<p>any impropriety or incorrectness in passing the impugned order.<\/p>\n<p>     8.   In this application for condonation of delay, we have<\/p>\n<p>chosen to hear the learned counsel for the appellant on merits<\/p>\n<p>only to satisfy ourselves that our rejection of the request to<\/p>\n<p>condone the delay does not result in any failure\/miscarriage of<\/p>\n<p>justice.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">Mat.Appeal No.769 of 2009       4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>     9.    We are not satisfied that it is necessary, in these<\/p>\n<p>circumstances, to order notice to the respondent\/claimants in<\/p>\n<p>this application for condonation of delay. The matter can be<\/p>\n<p>disposed of without notice to them.\n<\/p>\n<p>     10. In the result, C.M.Appl.No.2810 of 2009 to condone<\/p>\n<p>the delay is dismissed. Consequently the Mat.Appeal shall stand<\/p>\n<p>rejected as bared by limitation.\n<\/p>\n<p>     11. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that<\/p>\n<p>the Family Court does not grant opportunity to the judgment<\/p>\n<p>debtor to raise all relevant contentions against the attempt for<\/p>\n<p>execution.   If that be so, that grievance is to be raised in<\/p>\n<p>appropriate proceedings.       That submission does not also<\/p>\n<p>persuade us to condone the delay or admit the appeal.<\/p>\n<p>                                     (R.BASANT, JUDGE)<\/p>\n<p>                                   (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE)<\/p>\n<p>rtr\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Muhammed Shafi vs Nadiya on 13 October, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Mat.Appeal.No. 769 of 2009() 1. MUHAMMED SHAFI,AGED 30 YEARS, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. NADIYA, AGED 23 YEARS, &#8230; Respondent 2. FATHIMA SHERIN (MINOR), For Petitioner :SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon&#8217;ble MR. Justice [&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-153295","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>Muhammed Shafi vs Nadiya on 13 October, 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\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Muhammed Shafi vs Nadiya on 13 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-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=\"2009-10-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-24T03:39:19+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\\\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Muhammed Shafi vs Nadiya on 13 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-24T03:39:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":705,\"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\\\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009\",\"name\":\"Muhammed Shafi vs Nadiya on 13 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-24T03:39:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Muhammed Shafi vs Nadiya on 13 October, 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":"Muhammed Shafi vs Nadiya on 13 October, 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\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Muhammed Shafi vs Nadiya on 13 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-24T03:39:19+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\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Muhammed Shafi vs Nadiya on 13 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-24T03:39:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009"},"wordCount":705,"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\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009","name":"Muhammed Shafi vs Nadiya on 13 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-24T03:39:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammed-shafi-vs-nadiya-on-13-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Muhammed Shafi vs Nadiya on 13 October, 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\/153295","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=153295"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/153295\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=153295"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=153295"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=153295"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}