{"id":154290,"date":"2009-07-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-07-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009"},"modified":"2016-12-18T15:43:22","modified_gmt":"2016-12-18T10:13:22","slug":"venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009","title":{"rendered":"Venugopalan Kidavu vs Pokkali Padmanabhan on 8 July, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Venugopalan Kidavu vs Pokkali Padmanabhan on 8 July, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 21601 of 2008(V)\n\n\n1. VENUGOPALAN KIDAVU, AGED 63 YEARS\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. POKKALI PADMANABHAN,S\/O. GOVINDAN\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THILOTHAMA, D\/O. KUNHIKANARAN\n\n3. VENUGOPALAN, H\/O. THILOTHAMA\n\n4. MEYAHAMETHAL MOOTHARAN\n\n5. ELATHU METHAL KANDTHY\n\n6. RAMACHANDRAN KIDAVU\n\n7. GANGADHARAN KIDAVU\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.NIRMAL. S\n\n                For Respondent  :SMT.VEENA HARI\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN\n\n Dated :08\/07\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                   S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.\n\n               ````````````````````````````````````````````````````\n                    W.P.(C) No. 21601 OF 2008 V\n               ````````````````````````````````````````````````````\n                  Dated this the 8th day of July, 2009\n\n                             J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
             The 7th defendant in OS.No.339\/90 on the file of the<\/p>\n
Principal Munsiff, Kozhikode, has filed this writ petition. Suit was<\/p>\n
one for perpetual prohibitory injunction and the 1st respondent is<\/p>\n
the plaintiff. The 1st respondent passed away during the pendency<\/p>\n
of this writ petition, and his legal heirs have been impleaded as<\/p>\n
additional plaintiffs in the suit. The 5th and 6th defendants claim<\/p>\n
right of possession over a property having an extent of 1 acre and<\/p>\n
41 3\/4 cents which was obtained under a deed executed by the<\/p>\n
plaintiff(late). Ext.P2 is the copy of that deed. Later, these<\/p>\n
defendants moved an application for amending their written<\/p>\n
statement contending that the property covered by the deed as per<\/p>\n
the measurements shown was 2 acre and 43 cents but by mistake<\/p>\n
after showing the measurements the extent was shown as 1 acre<\/p>\n
and 41 3\/4 cents. The amendment sought for was objected to by<\/p>\n
the plaintiff and after hearing both sides, the learned Munsiff<\/p>\n
disallowed the amendment. Ext.P7 is the copy of the order passed<\/p>\n
WPC.21601\/08
\n                                  : 2 :<\/span><\/p>\n
declining the amendment. Propriety and correctness of that order<\/p>\n
is challenged in the writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
      2.    I heard the counsel on both sides. It is submitted by<\/p>\n
the counsel for the petition that the proposed amendment with<\/p>\n
respect to the extent of the land is in tune with the measurement<\/p>\n
shown in the schedule of the title deed and the extent stated was<\/p>\n
by a mistake in preparing and filing the written statement. That<\/p>\n
mistake in the deed was carried over and unless it is corrected,<\/p>\n
prejudice will be caused to these defendants. On the other hand,<\/p>\n
learned counsel for the plaintiff would contend that the extent of<\/p>\n
the property claimed by the defendant stated in the written<\/p>\n
statement is a specific admission as coming under section 58 of<\/p>\n
the Evidence Act and as such the defendants have no right to<\/p>\n
seek its withdrawal. These defendants have filed an additional<\/p>\n
written statement which was also received by the court, according<\/p>\n
to the learned counsel. That circumstance is also canvassed to<\/p>\n
contend that the proposed amendment for withdrawing of an<\/p>\n
admission in the written statement cannot be permitted and the<\/p>\n
order of the court below declining that amendment is proper, valid<\/p>\n
and correct. So on the facts presented, the question emerging for<\/p>\n
WPC.21601\/08
\n                                 : 3 :<\/span><\/p>\n
consideration is whether the extent of the land claimed by the<\/p>\n
defendants as shown in their written statements would constitute a<\/p>\n
judicial admission as contemplated under section 58 of the<\/p>\n
Evidence Act. If that proposition is accepted, then any mistake<\/p>\n
appearing in the pleading of any party cannot be corrected and<\/p>\n
then Order 6 Rule 17 CPC would be rendered nugatory and<\/p>\n
meaningless. The above Rule is essentially intended to provide an<\/p>\n
opportunity to seek correction of mistakes in the pleadings so that<\/p>\n
the actual controversy involved in the lis can be determined. The<\/p>\n
extent stated as 1 acre and 41 3\/4 cents shown in Ext.P2 deed<\/p>\n
which admittedly was executed by the plaintiff(late) in favour of the<\/p>\n
defendants does not tally with the measurements specifically<\/p>\n
shown in that deed is not disputed. So the essential question is<\/p>\n
whether there was any mistake in the measurement or in the<\/p>\n
actual extent shown. Probably, such a mistake could have crept in<\/p>\n
the measurement also, and need not be in the extent shown. But<\/p>\n
in determining the issue raised for consideration at this stage<\/p>\n
when the defendant canvasses for correction of the extent stated<\/p>\n
in his written statement, it cannot be denied on the ground that the<\/p>\n
earlier statement constituted an admission. An admission can be<\/p>\n
WPC.21601\/08
\n                                  : 4 :<\/span><\/p>\n
shown to be wrong by the party who made it. Admissions are not<\/p>\n
conclusive, and no admission will confer title.       Suit is one for<\/p>\n
injunction. The burden is on the plaintiff to prove his possession<\/p>\n
over the property scheduled in the plaint. It is admitted that now<\/p>\n
the schedule has been amended so as to claim a lesser extent<\/p>\n
than what was earlier stated in the plaint.        If the contention<\/p>\n
pressed into service by the plaintiff to resist the claim of the<\/p>\n
defendant that the extent shown earlier constituted an admission,<\/p>\n
the plaintiff also could not have amended the schedule. Whatever<\/p>\n
amendments which are necessary for resolving the controversy<\/p>\n
arising in a lis if it does not cause prejudice or injury to the other<\/p>\n
side has to be permitted because in drafting of plaint or written<\/p>\n
statement, which is usually done by advocates, there is every<\/p>\n
chance of errors and mistakes creeping in and that should not be<\/p>\n
allowed to cause injury to the parties involved in the lis. If the<\/p>\n
advocate had taken care to examine Ext.P2 sale deed when the<\/p>\n
written statement was prepared and filed, the mistake could have<\/p>\n
been noticed. For that reason alone, the written statement filed<\/p>\n
showing a lesser extent, which does not reflect with the deed, the<\/p>\n
defendant cannot be denied an opportunity to correct his written<\/p>\n
WPC.21601\/08
\n                                 : 5 :<\/span><\/p>\n
statement. View expressed by the court below that the correction<\/p>\n
sought for by the defendant would amount to advancing of a new<\/p>\n
case is erroneous. No new case is sought to be introduced but<\/p>\n
only the description of the property made in tune with his deed.<\/p>\n
Amendment in the written statement has to be permitted as it is<\/p>\n
required to resolve the controversy involved in the suit.       The<\/p>\n
arguments advanced by the learned counsel that an additional<\/p>\n
written statement is filed and so the amendment need not be<\/p>\n
allowed lacks merit because the defendant by his pleadings is not<\/p>\n
setting up a conflicting version. So setting aside Ext.P7 order, the<\/p>\n
amendment sought for by the defendant is allowed. The learned<\/p>\n
counsel for the plaintiff seeks permission to amend the plaint in<\/p>\n
view of the permission given to the defendant in the written<\/p>\n
statement. The plaintiff is free to amend the plaint if so advised,<\/p>\n
and also if provided by law.\n<\/p>\n
                                                               Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
                           (S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE)<\/p>\n
aks<\/p>\n
                           \/\/ True Copy \/\/<\/p>\n
                                         P.A. to Judge<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Venugopalan Kidavu vs Pokkali Padmanabhan on 8 July, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 21601 of 2008(V) 1. VENUGOPALAN KIDAVU, AGED 63 YEARS … Petitioner Vs 1. POKKALI PADMANABHAN,S\/O. GOVINDAN … Respondent 2. THILOTHAMA, D\/O. KUNHIKANARAN 3. VENUGOPALAN, H\/O. THILOTHAMA 4. MEYAHAMETHAL MOOTHARAN 5. ELATHU METHAL KANDTHY 6. […]<\/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-154290","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nVenugopalan Kidavu vs Pokkali Padmanabhan on 8 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Venugopalan Kidavu vs Pokkali Padmanabhan on 8 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-07-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-12-18T10:13:22+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\\\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Venugopalan Kidavu vs Pokkali Padmanabhan on 8 July, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-12-18T10:13:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1008,\"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\\\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009\",\"name\":\"Venugopalan Kidavu vs Pokkali Padmanabhan on 8 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-12-18T10:13:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Venugopalan Kidavu vs Pokkali Padmanabhan on 8 July, 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":"Venugopalan Kidavu vs Pokkali Padmanabhan on 8 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Venugopalan Kidavu vs Pokkali Padmanabhan on 8 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-07-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-12-18T10:13:22+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\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Venugopalan Kidavu vs Pokkali Padmanabhan on 8 July, 2009","datePublished":"2009-07-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-12-18T10:13:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009"},"wordCount":1008,"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\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009","name":"Venugopalan Kidavu vs Pokkali Padmanabhan on 8 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-07-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-12-18T10:13:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/venugopalan-kidavu-vs-pokkali-padmanabhan-on-8-july-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Venugopalan Kidavu vs Pokkali Padmanabhan on 8 July, 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\/154290","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=154290"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/154290\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=154290"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=154290"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=154290"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}