{"id":160626,"date":"2009-10-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009"},"modified":"2015-09-21T22:37:48","modified_gmt":"2015-09-21T17:07:48","slug":"state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"State Of Punjab And Another vs M\/S Fair Deal Filing Station on 28 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">State Of Punjab And Another vs M\/S Fair Deal Filing Station on 28 October, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>           In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh\n\n                          VATAP No. 36 of 2009\n\n                     Date of Decision: October 28, 2009\n\nState of Punjab and another\n\n                                                                ...Appellants\n\n                                   Versus\n\nM\/s Fair Deal Filing Station\n\n                                                               ...Respondent\n\nCORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR\n\n            HON'BLE MS JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR\n\nPresent:    Mr. Piyush Kant Jain, Addl. AG, Punjab\n            for the appellants.\n\n1.    To be referred to the Reporters or not?\n2.    Whether the judgment should be reported in\n      the Digest?\n\nM.M. KUMAR, J.\n<\/pre>\n<p>            This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 68(2) of the<\/p>\n<p>Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for brevity, &#8216;the VAT Act&#8217;) challenges<\/p>\n<p>order dated 1.12.2008 (A-3) passed by the Value Added Tax Tribunal,<\/p>\n<p>Punjab, Chandigarh (for brevity, &#8216;the Tribunal&#8217;) in Appeal No. 309 of 2006-<\/p>\n<p>07. The Tribunal has reached the conclusion that input tax credit in respect<\/p>\n<p>of the stock held by the dealer-respondent on the appointed date was to be<\/p>\n<p>allowed as per the provisions of Section 14 of the VAT Act. The Tribunal<\/p>\n<p>also found that the tax had already been paid by the dealer-respondent and<\/p>\n<p>merely because the application was not filed within the prescribed time limit,<\/p>\n<p>it could not have been denied the ITC claim and penalised for delay by<\/p>\n<p>burdening with costs.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\"> VATAP No. 36 of 2009                                                     2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>2.          The controversy raised in the instant appeal is no longer res<\/p>\n<p>integra and the same has already been set at rest by a Division Bench of this<\/p>\n<p>Court in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/1826751\/\">State of Punjab v. M\/s City Petro,<\/a> (2009) 33 PHT 167<\/p>\n<p>(P&amp;H). The Division Bench after noticing the provisions of Rule 25 of the<\/p>\n<p>Punjab Value Added Tax Rules, 2005, Section 14 of the VAT Act and the<\/p>\n<p>judgment of Hon&#8217;ble the Supreme Court rendered in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/791131\/\">Chairman,<\/p>\n<p>Indore Vikas Pradhikaran v. Pure Industrial Coke &amp; Chemicals Ltd.,<\/a><\/p>\n<p>(2007) 8 SCC 705, dismissed the appeal of the revenue in M\/s City Petro&#8217;s<\/p>\n<p>case (supra) by observing as under:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>            &#8220;9.          It is further appropriate to mention that the period<\/p>\n<p>            of 30 days was extended to 45 days by Act No. 11 of 2006 with<\/p>\n<p>            effect from 24.4.2006. The respondent had filed its input tax<\/p>\n<p>            credit claim on 18.6.2005 which was before the date of<\/p>\n<p>            publication of the VAT Rules.         By virtue of the use of<\/p>\n<p>            expression &#8216;appointed day&#8217; for counting the period of 30 days,<\/p>\n<p>            used in Rule 25(1)(b), an argument was raised by the revenue<\/p>\n<p>            that the period of 30 days or 45 days have to be counted from the<\/p>\n<p>            &#8216;appointed day&#8217; i.e. 1.4.2005. The Tribunal did not accept the<\/p>\n<p>            aforementioned argument because by no stretch of imagination<\/p>\n<p>            an impossible act could be permitted to be done. The VAT<\/p>\n<p>            Rules were published on 21.6.2005 and the &#8216;appointed day&#8217; of<\/p>\n<p>            1.4.2005 would require a dealer to file his return within 45 days,<\/p>\n<p>            which would expire on 15.5.2005. This could never be intention<\/p>\n<p>            of the legislature which has provided by Sections 13 and 14 of<\/p>\n<p>            the VAT Act that a dealer can file his statement of input tax<\/p>\n<p>            credit claim subject to certain conditions.    Moreover, it is a<\/p>\n<p>            transitory statute repealing the earlier Sales Tax Act. The goods<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> VATAP No. 36 of 2009                                                    3<\/span><br \/>\n          which have already suffered sales tax could not be subjected to<\/p>\n<p>          another doze of tax.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>          10.          It is, thus, evident that even if period of 45 days is<\/p>\n<p>          given from the &#8216;appointed day&#8217; i.e. 1.4.2005, no dealer could<\/p>\n<p>          have filed his input tax credit claim nor could the claim be filed<\/p>\n<p>          w.e.f. 24.4.2006 when further period of 15 days was granted<\/p>\n<p>          from that date.     It is well settled that the law does not<\/p>\n<p>          contemplate doing of an impossible act. The legislative intent is<\/p>\n<p>          clear from the reading of Sections 13 and 14 of the VAT Act,<\/p>\n<p>          which allow a dealer to claim input tax credit subject to various<\/p>\n<p>          other conditions. It is also clearly made out that period of 45<\/p>\n<p>          days is intended to be given to the dealer to make input tax<\/p>\n<p>          credit claim. However, the period of 45 days has to be counted<\/p>\n<p>          from the date of publication of the VAT Rules on 21.6.2005.<\/p>\n<p>          Any other interpretation would defeat the basic object of<\/p>\n<p>          Sections 13 and 14 of the VAT Act and the VAT Rules. If the<\/p>\n<p>          intention of the legislature and the rule making authorities is<\/p>\n<p>          gathered from the aforesaid provisions then the period of 45<\/p>\n<p>          days have to be granted from the date of publication of the VAT<\/p>\n<p>          Rules. Therefore, it would be appropriate to apply the rule of<\/p>\n<p>          purposive construction to a statute of this nature which would<\/p>\n<p>          make VAT Rules workable, as has been laid down in para 82 of<\/p>\n<p>          the judgment of Hon&#8217;ble the Supreme Court in the case of<\/p>\n<p>          <a href=\"\/doc\/791131\/\">Chairman, Indore Vikas Pradhikaran v. Pure Industrial<\/p>\n<p>          Coke &amp; Chemicals Ltd.,<\/a> (2007) 8 SCC 705.                 Such an<\/p>\n<p>          interpretation would be consistent with the intention of the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> VATAP No. 36 of 2009                                                     4<\/span><br \/>\n            legislature and the rule framing authorities and would advance<\/p>\n<p>            the object of the statute.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>                         For the reasons aforementioned, this appeal fails<\/p>\n<p>            and the same is dismissed.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>            Similar view has been reiterated in subsequent Division Bench<\/p>\n<p>judgments rendered in the cases of State of Punjab and another v. M\/s<\/p>\n<p>Indian Colour Centre (VATAP No. 80 of 2008, decided on 25.5.2009) and<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"\/doc\/1718705\/\">Lahori Mal Bimal Chand Jain v. State of Punjab and<\/a> another (VATAP<\/p>\n<p>No. 17 of 2008, decided on 5.9.2009).\n<\/p>\n<p>            In view of above, we are of the considered view that the instant<\/p>\n<p>appeal is squarely covered by the Division Bench judgment rendered in the<\/p>\n<p>case of M\/s City Petro (supra). Therefore, following the same reasoning the<\/p>\n<p>appeal is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>            In view of the fact that the appeal has been disposed of on merit,<\/p>\n<p>we do not feel the necessity of passing any order in the civil miscellaneous<\/p>\n<p>application filed alongwith the appeal and the same are disposed of as such.<\/p>\n<pre>\n\n\n\n\n                                                    (M.M. KUMAR)\n                                                       JUDGE\n\n\n\n\n                                                 (NIRMALJIT KAUR)\nOctober 28, 2009                                      JUDGE\nPkapoor\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Punjab-Haryana High Court State Of Punjab And Another vs M\/S Fair Deal Filing Station on 28 October, 2009 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh VATAP No. 36 of 2009 Date of Decision: October 28, 2009 State of Punjab and another &#8230;Appellants Versus M\/s Fair Deal Filing Station &#8230;Respondent CORAM: 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":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-160626","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>State Of Punjab And Another vs M\/S Fair Deal Filing Station on 28 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\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Of Punjab And Another vs M\/S Fair Deal Filing Station on 28 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-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=\"2009-10-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-09-21T17:07:48+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\\\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Of Punjab And Another vs M\\\/S Fair Deal Filing Station on 28 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-21T17:07:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":881,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009\",\"name\":\"State Of Punjab And Another vs M\\\/S Fair Deal Filing Station on 28 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-21T17:07:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Of Punjab And Another vs M\\\/S Fair Deal Filing Station on 28 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":"State Of Punjab And Another vs M\/S Fair Deal Filing Station on 28 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\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Of Punjab And Another vs M\/S Fair Deal Filing Station on 28 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-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":"2009-10-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-09-21T17:07:48+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\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Of Punjab And Another vs M\/S Fair Deal Filing Station on 28 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-21T17:07:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009"},"wordCount":881,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009","name":"State Of Punjab And Another vs M\/S Fair Deal Filing Station on 28 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-21T17:07:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-and-another-vs-ms-fair-deal-filing-station-on-28-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Of Punjab And Another vs M\/S Fair Deal Filing Station on 28 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\/160626","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=160626"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/160626\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=160626"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=160626"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=160626"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}