{"id":157561,"date":"2008-09-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008"},"modified":"2019-04-05T06:39:31","modified_gmt":"2019-04-05T01:09:31","slug":"united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"United vs Mahendrabhai on 5 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
United vs Mahendrabhai on 5 September, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: H.K.Rathod,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nFA\/2670\/2008\t 2\/ 7\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nFIRST\nAPPEAL No. 2670 of 2008\n \n\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nUNITED\nINDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD THROUGH - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nMAHENDRABHAI\nPAGJIBHAI PATEL & 4 - Defendant(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \n(MR\nPV NANAVATI) for\nAppellant(s) : 1,MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI for Appellant(s) : 1, \nNone\nfor Defendant(s) : 1 -\n5. \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 05\/09\/2008 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n
Heard
\n\tlearned advocate Mr. Vibhuti Nanavati on behalf of appellant United
\n\tIndia Insurance Co. Ltd.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tappellant has challenged the award passed by Motor Accident Claims
\n\tTribunal at Gandhinagar in MACP No. 290\/2004 vide exh 42 dated
\n\t11\/12\/2007.  The Claims Tribunal has partly allowed application u\/s
\n\t163(A) of Motor Vehicles Act filed by the claimant and awarded Rs.
\n\t1,74,500\/- being a compensation to be recovered from respondent with
\n\t9% interest. The Claims Tribunal has held liable to appellant
\n\tInsurance company to indemnify the award amount of Rs. 1,00,000\/-
\n\twith costs and interest and rest of the amount be recovered from
\n\topponent no. 1 and 3.\n<\/p>\n
Learned
\n\tadvocate Mr. Nanavati raised contention before this Court that
\n\tTribunal has misunderstood the policy and contention raised by
\n\tInsurance company.  The specific contention raised in appeal memo in
\n\tground D, E and F, which are relevant, therefore, quoted as under:\n<\/p>\n
?S(D)\tThe
\n\tlearned Tribunal ought to have appreciated that IMT 15 (GR 36)
\n\tcovers the contractual liability of the insurance company for the
\n\towner-driver alone.\n<\/p>\n
(E)\tThe
\n\tlearned Tribunal ought to have appreciated IMT 15 (GR 36) which
\n\treads as under:\n<\/p>\n
?SCompulsory
\n\t\t\tPA cover for the owner-driver shall be applicable in both the
\n\t\t\tliabilities and package policies.  The owner of the insured
\n\t\t\tvehicle holding effective driving licence is taken as owner-driver
\n\t\t\tfor the purpose of this Section.  Cover is provided to the
\n\t\t\towner-driver whilst driving the vehicle including mounting
\n\t\t\tinto\/dismounting from or traveling in the insured vehicle as
\n\t\t\tco-driver.\n<\/p>\n
Thus,
\n\t\t\tthe finding on the issue of contractual liability for the death of
\n\t\t\tthe deceased out of vehicular accident is entirely erroneous and
\n\t\t\tagainst the basic principles.\n<\/p>\n
\t(F)\tThe
\nlearned Tribunal ought to have \tappreciated that deceased Ajitsingh
\nRamsingh \tJala was not the owner of the motor cycle \tbearing
\nregistration No. GJ-18-F-723 which \twas insured with the appellant
\ninsurance \tcompany.??\n<\/p>\n
Except
\n\tthat no other contention raised by learned advocate Mr. Nanavati.\n<\/p>\n
In
\n\tshort, his submission is that driver was not Owner of the vehicle
\n\tmeans insured. Therefore, risk of only driver is not covered under
\n\tthe Insurance policy, but risk of driver cum owner is covered under
\n\tthe policy. Therefore, he submitted that claims Tribunal has not
\n\tproperly appreciated the question of law of Insurance company upto
\n\tRs. 1,00,000\/- which can not considered to be statutory liability
\n\tbut it was a contractual liability.\n<\/p>\n
I
\n\thave considered submissions made by learned advocate Mr. Nanavati
\n\tand in respect to the contention raised before claims Tribunal,
\n\tclaims Tribunal has examined this question in para 14, which is
\n\tquoted as under:\n<\/p>\n
?S14.\tThe
\n\tOpponent no. 4 Insurance Company come with a case that the deceased
\n\thimself was negligent for driving this vehicle and therefore, the
\n\tInsurance company is not liable.  The deceased himself was driving
\n\tinsured vehicle and therefore, no liability can be fastened against
\n\tthe Insurance company.  The Insurance policy is produced at Mark
\n\t27\/1.  The premium is taken by the Insurance Company of 558\/- and
\n\tthe risk covered for driver up to Rs. 1,00,000\/-.  The learned
\n\tadvocate for the opponent no. 4 alternatively has submitted that no
\n\tliability can be fastened more than Rs. 1,00,000\/-, it is gainful to
\n\trefer judgement reported in 2007 ACJ 1934 between Yallwwa and others
\n\tVs. National Insurance Co. Ltd.  The Honourable Supreme Court has
\n\theld in para 16 that ?SThe question is required to be considered
\n\tis, what would be the meaning of the term award when such a
\n\tcontention is raised?  Although in a given situation having regard
\n\tto the liability of the owner of the vehicle, a Claims Tribunal need
\n\tnot go into the question as to whether the owner of the vehicle in
\n\tquestion was at fault or not but determination of the liability of
\n\tthe insurance company, in our opinion, stands on a different
\n\tfooting.  When a statutory liability has been imposed upon the
\n\towner, in our opinion, the same cannot extend the liability of an
\n\tinsurer to indemnify the owner, although in terms of the Insurance
\n\tpolicy or under the Act, it would not be liable therefor.??\n<\/p>\n
?SConsidering the
\nsame liability of the opponent, insurance company cannot be fastened
\nmore than Rs. 1,00,000\/- and therefor, the opponent no. 4 Insurance
\ncompany is liable to indemnify the award amount of Rs. 1,00,000\/- to
\nthe claimants.??\n<\/p>\n
In
\n\tview of the aforesaid discussion made in para 14, no doubt facts
\n\tbefore the Tribunal were not much clear, which were made by the
\n\tInsurance company. The Insurance policy produced at mark 27\/1 and
\n\tpremium of Rs. 588\/- was general premium, which was obtained by the
\n\tInsurance company, but whether risk of driver alone or driver cum
\n\towner is covered or not, that part is not made clear before claims
\n\tTribunal i.e. how on the basis of admission of learned advocate of
\n\tInsurance company that alternatively, no liability can be fastened
\n\tmore than Rs. 1,00,000\/-.\n<\/p>\n
Therefore,
\n\tclaims Tribunal has considered submissions of advocate of Insurance
\n\tcompany and accordingly, direction has been issued holding liability
\n\tof Rs. 1,00,000\/- for the appellant company and for the rest of
\n\tamount,  respondent no. 1 and 3 have been held liable.\n<\/p>\n
Therefore,
\n\taccording to my opinion, this technical contention, no doubt, makes
\n\tlot of difference but any how contractual liability  or statutory
\n\tliability, the Insurance company has accepted liability being
\n\tcontractual upto Rs. 1,00,000\/- and that has been awarded by claims
\n\tTribunal. Considering statutorily, that has not proper, but in
\n\tsubstance claimant claiming amount of Rs. 1,00,000\/-, it may
\n\tconsider to be statutorily or it may be considered to be
\n\tcontractual.  Ultimately, for the claimant, it does not make much
\n\tdifference. Legally, Insurance company is right that statutory
\n\tliability is covered u\/s 147 and contractual liability depends upon
\n\tcontract between insured and insurer.  Rs. 1,00,000\/- has been
\n\tadmitted by advocate of insurance company that was contractual
\n\tliability not statutory liability.  On being clarification, no
\n\tfurther discussion is necessary.  Therefore, this appeal is disposed
\n\tof with aforesaid clarification.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tappellant insurance company is directed to deposit Rs. 1,00,000\/-
\n\twith proportionate costs and interest before claims Tribunal within
\n\ta period of six weeks from today. After realizing the amount from
\n\tinsurance company, it is directed to claims Tribunal concerned to
\n\tpay the said amount to claimant Ramsing Umedsinh Zala by A\/c payee
\n\tcheque.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tRegistry of this Court is directed to transmit Rs. 25,000\/-, which
\n\thas been deposited by insurance company to concerned claims Tribunal
\n\timmediately.\n<\/p>\n
In
\n\tview of fact that present first appeal is disposed of, no order is
\n\trequired to be passed in civil application.  Therefore, civil
\n\tapplication is disposed of accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(H.K.RATHOD, J)<\/p>\n
asma<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court United vs Mahendrabhai on 5 September, 2008 Author: H.K.Rathod,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print FA\/2670\/2008 2\/ 7 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 2670 of 2008 ========================================================= UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD THROUGH – Appellant(s) Versus MAHENDRABHAI PAGJIBHAI PATEL & 4 – Defendant(s) ========================================================= […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-157561","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nUnited vs Mahendrabhai on 5 September, 2008 - 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\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"United vs Mahendrabhai on 5 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-09-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-04-05T01:09:31+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"United vs Mahendrabhai on 5 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-05T01:09:31+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1095,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008\",\"name\":\"United vs Mahendrabhai on 5 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-05T01:09:31+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"United vs Mahendrabhai on 5 September, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"United vs Mahendrabhai on 5 September, 2008 - 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\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"United vs Mahendrabhai on 5 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-04-05T01:09:31+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"United vs Mahendrabhai on 5 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-05T01:09:31+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008"},"wordCount":1095,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008","name":"United vs Mahendrabhai on 5 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-05T01:09:31+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/united-vs-mahendrabhai-on-5-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"United vs Mahendrabhai on 5 September, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/157561","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=157561"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/157561\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=157561"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=157561"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=157561"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}