{"id":160893,"date":"1990-08-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1990-08-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990"},"modified":"2019-03-29T17:39:42","modified_gmt":"2019-03-29T12:09:42","slug":"uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990","title":{"rendered":"Uma Prasad Roy vs Air Vice Marshal Abhay Kumar on 28 August, 1990"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Uma Prasad Roy vs Air Vice Marshal Abhay Kumar on 28 August, 1990<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: ILR 1990 KAR 4039, 1990 (2) KarLJ 396<\/div>\n
Author: S Bhat<\/div>\n
Bench: S Bhat<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
Shivashankar Bhat, J.<\/p>\n
1. The trial Court has permitted the landlord to raise an additional ground under Section 21(1)(h) of the Karnataka Rent Control Act (‘the Act’ for short), by allowing I.A.III. This order is under challenge.\n<\/p>\n
2. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner before me that the; petition for amendment was not maintainable because the proceedings had come up to this Court earlier in C.R.P. No. 591 of 1990 and the matter was remitted back to the trial Court for a fresh consideration in the light of the decision therein. From this, the learned Counsel for the petitioner wants to derive the inference that the parties are confined to the existing contentions before the order of remand and no amendment is permissible after the matter is remitted. It is not possible for me to accept this contention. When the order was set aside and the matter was remitted back by this Court, the entire proceedings before the trial Court revived in the absence of any limitation imposed on the proceedings, by this Court after the remand. This Court said, in the earlier C.R.P., that the parties are at liberty to lead further evidence for which opportunity was given to the parties. If for any reason any one of the parties makes out a case for amendment of the pleadings, such a matter cannot come in the way; an order thereon has to be made depending upon the merits of the application.\n<\/p>\n
3. By the application for amendment, the respondent herein sought to claim the benefit of Section 21(1)(h) of the Act. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the ground under Section 21(1)(h) of the Act is different from a claim under Section 21B and therefore a claim under Section 21(1)(h) cannot be clubbed with an application filed earlier seeking an eviction under Section 21B of the Act. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, under Section 21B all that the landlord had to do was to establish his requirement being bonafide by producing the requisite certificate. The approach of the Court under Section 21(1)(h) of the Act will be quite different and the rights and liabilities of parties also would be different thereunder, such as the consideration of comparative hardship under Section 21(h). The learned Counsel also refers to the opening words in Section 21B. It says that the said provision is “notwithstanding anything contained in this Act.” In other words, according to the learned Counsel, Section 21B is entirely independent and exclusive not only in its application but also in the matter of invoking it by the landlord. The contention is that claims under Section 21(1)(h) and 21B cannot be clubbed together in a single petition for eviction.\n<\/p>\n
4. I am not able to persuade myself to agree with the learned Counsel for the petitioner on this contention, also. A landlord can make out a case either under Clause (h) or under other clauses of Section 21(1) of the Act. He may also seek eviction alternatively under these provisions, though it can also be the basis of an independent claim. In the instant case, the landlord sought eviction under Section 21B. Now he is seeking eviction on another ground, under Section 21(1)(h) of the Act. The mode of proof under Section 21B is more liberal and entirely in favour of the landlord, in view of the evidentiary value attached to the certificate, he is required to produce., But under Section 21(1)(h), the burden of establishing the genuiness and reasonableness of the requirement is entirely on the landlord. By the amendment, seeking the introduction of a case under   Section   21(1)(h),   landlord   is   seeking   to   make  an alternative   case,   in   case   the   certificate   he   produces for    the    purpose    of    Section    2,1 B    fails    to    satisfy the   Court.   The   ultimate   object,   whether   it   is   a   case under   Section   21(1)(h)  or   under   Section   21B,   is   to   get the   tenant   vacated   so   that   landlord   may   occupy   the premises,    by    himself.    The   basic   idea   behind   Section 21(1)(h)   and   213   is   the   same;   i.e.,   to   facilitate   the eviction    of    tenant    when    the    landlord    requires    the premises   bonafide   and   reasonably,   for   his  own   occupation.   The   amendment   sought   by   the   landlord,   thus,   in no way alters the real character of the eviction petition. Section  218  was  introduced  in  the year  1983 as another ground    enabling    the    landlord    to   seek    eviction.   This ground   was   introduced  by  a  separate  Section,  only   for the   legislative   convenience    instead   of   adding   another clause   to   Section   21(1)   of   the   Act.   Nothing  prevented the  legislature   from   introducing  Section  21B  as  another clause to Section 21(1) of the Act. The format in which a  new  circumstance  for  eviction  has been  brought  into the   Act   does   not   in   any   way   alter   the   substance   of the  ground   for  the eviction of  the  tenant. The decision of   the   Supreme    Court    in    SHIVA    RAO    v.   CECILIA PEREIRA<\/a> 1987(1) KLJ 182  has  no application to the facts of this case. In  the  said  case,  after  the   landlord  obtained  a decree in   a   Civil   Court   for   possession   of   the   property,   the Act stood extended to the area and it is in that  situation the  Supreme   Court   held   that   the   Civil   Court’s  decree was inexecutable. The  learned  Counsel  for the petitioner drew my attention to para 5 of the said decision. Observations  in  para  5  refers to  the principle governing the interpretation    of    a    beneficial    legislation    like    Rent Control   Act.   That   principle  does  not  extend  to  compel a  landlord   to   seek   eviction  under  Section  21B   independently    of    a    claim    under   Section    21(1)(h).    Beneficial legislations do    not   expect    multiplicity   of   proceedings; in fact,  to  achieve  the object of  the Act,  multiplicity of   proceedings    should   be avoided.   Section   21B    is   a  special   provision   enacted   for   the   benefit   of   members of Armed Forces; those who are the beneficiaries of the said provision cannot be and should not be compelled to resort to several proceedings to get vacant possession of the premises; the very object of Section 21B will be frustrated otherwise, Section 21B shortens the process of litigation by ensuring evidentiary value to the certificate referred therein. Similarly, the decision in GOVINDAMMA v. MURUGESH MUDALIAR  also has no application. It considered the Civil Court’s jurisdiction to make an order of eviction. The said decision does not say that the non-obstante clause in the opening section of Section 21B results in denying the benefits of other provisions of the Act to the landlord. The non-obstante clause in Section 21B only highlights the special feature of the provision and deprives the protection afforded to the tenant under other provisions of the Act, if the case falls under Section 21B.\n<\/p>\n
The trial Court has rightly permitted the amendment. Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. The trial Court is directed to conclude the trial and dispose of the matter before the end of January, 1991.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Uma Prasad Roy vs Air Vice Marshal Abhay Kumar on 28 August, 1990 Equivalent citations: ILR 1990 KAR 4039, 1990 (2) KarLJ 396 Author: S Bhat Bench: S Bhat ORDER Shivashankar Bhat, J. 1. The trial Court has permitted the landlord to raise an additional ground under Section 21(1)(h) of the Karnataka […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-160893","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nUma Prasad Roy vs Air Vice Marshal Abhay Kumar on 28 August, 1990 - 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\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Uma Prasad Roy vs Air Vice Marshal Abhay Kumar on 28 August, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990\" \/>\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=\"1990-08-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-29T12:09:42+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\\\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Uma Prasad Roy vs Air Vice Marshal Abhay Kumar on 28 August, 1990\",\"datePublished\":\"1990-08-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-29T12:09:42+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990\"},\"wordCount\":1171,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990\",\"name\":\"Uma Prasad Roy vs Air Vice Marshal Abhay Kumar on 28 August, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1990-08-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-29T12:09:42+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Uma Prasad Roy vs Air Vice Marshal Abhay Kumar on 28 August, 1990\"}]},{\"@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":"Uma Prasad Roy vs Air Vice Marshal Abhay Kumar on 28 August, 1990 - 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\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Uma Prasad Roy vs Air Vice Marshal Abhay Kumar on 28 August, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1990-08-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-29T12:09:42+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\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Uma Prasad Roy vs Air Vice Marshal Abhay Kumar on 28 August, 1990","datePublished":"1990-08-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-29T12:09:42+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990"},"wordCount":1171,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990","name":"Uma Prasad Roy vs Air Vice Marshal Abhay Kumar on 28 August, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1990-08-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-29T12:09:42+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/uma-prasad-roy-vs-air-vice-marshal-abhay-kumar-on-28-august-1990#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Uma Prasad Roy vs Air Vice Marshal Abhay Kumar on 28 August, 1990"}]},{"@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\/160893","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=160893"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/160893\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=160893"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=160893"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=160893"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}