{"id":15979,"date":"2010-03-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-03-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010"},"modified":"2014-12-12T07:51:37","modified_gmt":"2014-12-12T02:21:37","slug":"abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010","title":{"rendered":"Abdul Rehiman vs Meethian Kunju on 12 March, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Abdul Rehiman vs Meethian Kunju on 12 March, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRSA.No. 1187 of 2009()\n\n\n1. ABDUL REHIMAN ,AGED 47,S\/O.KUNJIN PILLAI\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. MEETHIAN KUNJU,S\/O.ABUBACKER\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. NABEESA,W\/O. MEETHIAN KUNJU\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR)\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.P.N.PURUSHOTHAMA KAIMAL\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH\n\n Dated :12\/03\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                           THOMAS P JOSEPH, J.\n\n                      ----------------------------------------\n\n                         R.S.A.No.1187 of 2009G\n\n                      ---------------------------------------\n\n                  Dated this 12th day of March, 2010\n\n                                  JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
      On an agreement for sale executed between appellant and<\/p>\n
respondents on 02-04-1997 in respect of the suit property, appellant<\/p>\n
laid the suit for its specific performance. Appellant stated that the suit<\/p>\n
property was agreed to be assigned to him for a total consideration of<\/p>\n
Rs.1,60,000\/-, Rs.5,000\/- was paid to the respondents as advance on<\/p>\n
the date of agreement and eight months’ time was provided for<\/p>\n
execution of the assignment deed.             On 20-04-1997 appellant paid<\/p>\n
further sum of Rs.1,20,000\/- to the respondents who made an<\/p>\n
endorsement to that effect on the back of Ext.A1 itself. On 23-12-1997<\/p>\n
appellant issued notice to the respondents to perform their part of the<\/p>\n
contract. That notice was returned unclaimed. A further notice was<\/p>\n
issued on 23-01-1998 for which there was no reply. Hence the suit.<\/p>\n
Respondents admitted Ext.A1, agreement for sale and receipt of<\/p>\n
Rs.5,000\/- that day but denied that there was any further payment.<\/p>\n
They claimed that appellant failed to perform his part of the contract.<\/p>\n
Trial court granted decree in favour of the appellant. Respondents<\/p>\n
took up the matter in appeal and there was a remand. Thereafter,<\/p>\n
appellant adduced further evidence but trial court was not impressed<\/p>\n
by that evidence and refused to grant specific performance but, a<\/p>\n
R.S.A.No.1187 of 2009              2<\/span><\/p>\n
decree for recovery of Rs.5,000\/- was granted. Appellant challenged<\/p>\n
that judgment and decree before the first appellate court but, in vain.<\/p>\n
Hence second appeal urging by way of substantial questions of law<\/p>\n
whether failure to reply to a notice affected case of respondents and<\/p>\n
whether appellant is entitled to get the disputed signature in Ext.A1(a)<\/p>\n
examined by an expert in the second appeal. Learned counsel would<\/p>\n
request that appellant may be given an opportunity to prove the<\/p>\n
authenticity of the disputed signature in Ext.A1(a) by taking the same<\/p>\n
to an expert.       Counsel for respondents would submit that no<\/p>\n
substantial question of law is involved in the appeal requiring its<\/p>\n
admission and hence the question of sending the document to expert<\/p>\n
at his stage does not arise. According to the learned counsel, on the<\/p>\n
evidence on record courts below are justified in refusing to grant<\/p>\n
specific performance.\n<\/p>\n
      2.    The     whole  dispute   centers   round   Ext.A1(a),   the<\/p>\n
endorsement allegedly made by or on behalf of respondents on the<\/p>\n
back of Ext.A1 which is to the effect that on 20-04-1997 they received<\/p>\n
Rs.1,20,000\/- from the appellant towards balance sale consideration.<\/p>\n
The endorsement is allegedly signed by the respondents. But that is<\/p>\n
denied by the respondents. Learned Sub Judge after perusal of the<\/p>\n
admitted and disputed signatures in Exts.A1 and A1(a) has formed the<\/p>\n
opinion that the signatures do not tally.\n<\/p>\n
      3.    According to the appellant, though as per the stipulation in<\/p>\n
R.S.A.No.1187 of 2009             3<\/span><\/p>\n
Ext.A1 he was to pay a sum of Rs.45,000\/- towards sale consideration<\/p>\n
within one week from 02-04-1997, respondents demanded a further<\/p>\n
sum of Rs.70,000\/- and hence Rs.1,20,000\/- was paid to the<\/p>\n
respondents on 20-04-1997. PW1 stated (before remand of the case)<\/p>\n
that Rs.1,20,000\/- was withdrawn from the bank on the previous day of<\/p>\n
20-04-1997 and produced Exts.A6 and A7 series, passbooks to prove<\/p>\n
the same but it turned out from Exts.A6 and A7 series that there was<\/p>\n
no such withdrawal on 20-04-1997 or immediately before that but,<\/p>\n
there was withdrawal of Rs.One Lakh from the account of appellant on<\/p>\n
31-10-1996 (which is before Ext.A1 dated 02-04-1997). After remand,<\/p>\n
PW1 explained that the sum of Rs.One Lakh withdrawn on 31-10-1996<\/p>\n
was lent to one Fakrudhin as per Ext.A7, demand promissory note<\/p>\n
(produced after remand) and Fakrudhin repaid that amount on 18-04-<\/p>\n
1997, the said amount was used for making payment of Rs.1,20,000\/-<\/p>\n
to the respondents on 20-04-1997. But appellants was not able to<\/p>\n
explain how, if the sum of Rs.One Lakh was repaid to him by<\/p>\n
Fakrudhin, Ext.A7, demand promissory note continued to be with the<\/p>\n
appellant. If that promissory note were executed by Fakrudhin, when<\/p>\n
he discharged liability under that, the same ought to have been<\/p>\n
returned to Fakrudhin and the latter should have been in custody of<\/p>\n
the same.     One can understand if the appellant had summoned<\/p>\n
Fakrudhin to give evidence, produce Ext.A7 and he did so. There is no<\/p>\n
acceptable evidence to show that Ext.A7 was really executed by the<\/p>\n
R.S.A.No.1187 of 2009               4<\/span><\/p>\n
said Fakrudhin. I must also bear in mind that this twist to the case of<\/p>\n
appellant came only after remand when he thought it necessary to<\/p>\n
explain his earlier version that Rs.1,20,000\/- was drawn from his<\/p>\n
account on the day previous day of 20-04-1997 and that amount was<\/p>\n
paid to the respondents as evidenced by Ext.A1(a).                In the<\/p>\n
circumstance, that version of appellant cannot be accepted.<\/p>\n
      4.    PW3 is a witness in Ext.A1 and A7. It is strange to see that<\/p>\n
he happened to be a witness in both the transactions.          PW3 was<\/p>\n
examined only after remand. Courts below were not impressed by the<\/p>\n
evidence of appellant regarding the payment of Rs.1,20,000\/- to the<\/p>\n
respondents.     Trial court has also observed that the admitted and<\/p>\n
disputed signatures in Exts.A1 and A1(a) did not appear to be the<\/p>\n
same. Since the records have been called for I also had the occasion<\/p>\n
to peruse the signatures in Exts.A1 and A1(a) and I am not able to say<\/p>\n
that the opinion expressed by the learned Sub Judge is wrong.<\/p>\n
      5.    Now the request is to send Ext.A1(a) for expert opinion.<\/p>\n
This is a case of 1998 and the written statement specifically denied<\/p>\n
receiving any amount on 20-04-1997 or, making any endorsement as<\/p>\n
per Exts.A1(a). No attempt was made by the appellant to send Ext.A1<\/p>\n
(a) to the expert for opinion. Atleast after remand such a step ought to<\/p>\n
have been taken if that were helpful to the appellant. Having not done<\/p>\n
and having invited adverse verdicts from the courts below it is not<\/p>\n
open to the appellant at this belated stage to request this court to send<\/p>\n
R.S.A.No.1187 of 2009              5<\/span><\/p>\n
Ext.A1(a) to the expert for opinion. I have gone through the records,<\/p>\n
perused judgments under challenge and heard counsel on both sides. I<\/p>\n
am not satisfied that there is any substantial question of law involved<\/p>\n
in the appeal requiring interference.\n<\/p>\n
      Resultantly the second appeal is dismissed in limine.<\/p>\n
                                                    THOMAS P JOSEPH,
\n                                                           JUDGE<\/p>\n
Sbna\/<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Abdul Rehiman vs Meethian Kunju on 12 March, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RSA.No. 1187 of 2009() 1. ABDUL REHIMAN ,AGED 47,S\/O.KUNJIN PILLAI … Petitioner Vs 1. MEETHIAN KUNJU,S\/O.ABUBACKER … Respondent 2. NABEESA,W\/O. MEETHIAN KUNJU For Petitioner :SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR) For Respondent :SRI.P.N.PURUSHOTHAMA KAIMAL The Hon’ble MR. Justice THOMAS […]<\/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-15979","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAbdul Rehiman vs Meethian Kunju on 12 March, 2010 - 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\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Abdul Rehiman vs Meethian Kunju on 12 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-03-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-12-12T02:21:37+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\\\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Abdul Rehiman vs Meethian Kunju on 12 March, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-12-12T02:21:37+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1116,\"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\\\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010\",\"name\":\"Abdul Rehiman vs Meethian Kunju on 12 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-12-12T02:21:37+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Abdul Rehiman vs Meethian Kunju on 12 March, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Abdul Rehiman vs Meethian Kunju on 12 March, 2010 - 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\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Abdul Rehiman vs Meethian Kunju on 12 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-03-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-12-12T02:21:37+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\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Abdul Rehiman vs Meethian Kunju on 12 March, 2010","datePublished":"2010-03-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-12-12T02:21:37+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010"},"wordCount":1116,"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\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010","name":"Abdul Rehiman vs Meethian Kunju on 12 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-03-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-12-12T02:21:37+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-rehiman-vs-meethian-kunju-on-12-march-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Abdul Rehiman vs Meethian Kunju on 12 March, 2010"}]},{"@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\/15979","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=15979"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15979\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15979"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15979"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15979"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}