{"id":161630,"date":"1996-11-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1996-11-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996"},"modified":"2018-04-08T23:11:05","modified_gmt":"2018-04-08T17:41:05","slug":"vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996","title":{"rendered":"Vemula Siviah Naidu vs State Of A.P. &amp; Anr on 28 November, 1996"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Vemula Siviah Naidu vs State Of A.P. &amp; Anr on 28 November, 1996<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: K. Ramaswamy, G.T. Nanavati<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nVEMULA SIVIAH NAIDU\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF A.P. &amp; ANR.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t28\/11\/1996\n\nBENCH:\nK. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI\n\n\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t\t\t O R D E R<br \/>\n     The appellant is the auction-purchaser of 5.86 acres in<br \/>\nPeddayyasamudram village  in Village District. The said land<br \/>\nwas brought  to sale on November 2, 1967 to realise the debt<br \/>\ndue to\tthe Govt.  from one K. Sankaraiah, the brother of K.<br \/>\nRadhakrishaniah, the respondent-plaintiff. The appellant had<br \/>\npurchase the  same in  the said\t auction. He was granted the<br \/>\nsale certificate  on April 31, 1969 under Ex-8-1. Later, the<br \/>\nsecond\trespondent,   Radhakrishaniah  filed  the  suit\t for<br \/>\nsetting aside  the sale. The trial Court dismissed the suit.<br \/>\nOn appeal,  the District Judge confirmed the same. In Second<br \/>\nAppeal No.632\/77  by judgment  and decree dated February 28,<br \/>\n1969, the  learned single  Judge of the High Court of Andhra<br \/>\nPradesh decreed\t the suit.  Thus,  this\t appeal\t by  special<br \/>\nleave.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The admitted  facts are  that K. Sankaraiah, the debtor<br \/>\nand the\t second respondent  are members of the joint family.<br \/>\nAt  a\tpartition  dated   July\t 26,   1954  under  Ex.B-13,<br \/>\nRadhakrishaniah was  granted a\tgreater share  since he\t had<br \/>\nundertaken to  discharge all  the liabilities  on the  joint<br \/>\nfamily\tproperties   including\tthe   debt   contracted\t  by<br \/>\nSankaraiah  from   the\tGovernment  under  a  mortgage.\t The<br \/>\ncontention raised  by the second respondent, which was found<br \/>\nacceptable by  the High\t Court, was  that since he was not a<br \/>\ndefaulter within  the meaning  of  Section  5  of  the\tA.P.<br \/>\nRevenue Recovery  Act, 1894  (for  short,  the\t`Act&#8217;),\t the<br \/>\nproperty belonging to the respondent could not be brought to<br \/>\nsale. In  support thereof, the learned Judge has relied upon<br \/>\nanother judgment  of that Court in Chatrati Srirama Murthi &amp;<br \/>\nOrs. vs.  Official Receiver  Krishna &amp;\tOrs. [(1957)  1\t AWR<br \/>\n216]. The  question is;\t whether the  view taken by the High<br \/>\nCourt is correct in law? The learned District Judge recorded<br \/>\na finding,  which was  also accepted by the High Court, that<br \/>\nthe properties\tare joint  family properties hypothecated to<br \/>\nthe Government\tfor securing  the loan\tby  Sankaraiah.\t The<br \/>\nsecond respondent  under  Ex.B-13  had\ttaken  bulk  of\t the<br \/>\nproperties including  the suit schedule property allotted to<br \/>\nhim in\tthe partition  with an undertaking &#8220;to discharge all<br \/>\nthe liabilities\t of the erstwhile joint family including the<br \/>\nloan obtained  from  the  Government&#8221;.\tThus,  the  question<br \/>\narises: whether\t the second respondent is a defaulter within<br \/>\nthe meaning  of Section\t 5 of  the Act?\t Section 5  reads as<br \/>\nunder:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>     &#8220;Whenever revenue\tmay be in arrear<br \/>\n     it\t shall\t be   lawful   for   the<br \/>\n     Collector\t  or\tother\t officer<br \/>\n     empowered by  the Collector in that<br \/>\n     behalf, to\t proceed to  recover the<br \/>\n     arrear, together  with interest and<br \/>\n     cost of  process  by  the\tsale  of<br \/>\n     dafaulter&#8217;s movable  and  immovable<br \/>\n     property, or  by execution\t against<br \/>\n     the  person  of  the  defaulter  in<br \/>\n     manner hereinafter provided.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>     It is  to remember\t that the  word `defaulter&#8217; connotes<br \/>\nthe person  who is  liable to discharge the debt. In view of<br \/>\nthe fact  that the joint family property was hypothecated to<br \/>\nthe  Government\t for  recovery\tof  the\t debt  taken  by  K.<br \/>\nSankaraiah and\tthe  second  respondent\t had  undertaken  to<br \/>\nredeem the  debt taken\tby Sankaraiah  and the partition was<br \/>\nsubject to  the above undertaking, the property is liable to<br \/>\nbe proceeded for recovery of the debt contracted upon it. As<br \/>\na consequence,\tthe second respondent is a defaulter for the<br \/>\npurpose of Section 5 of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Shri A.  Subba Rao,  learned counsel  appearing for the<br \/>\nsecond respondent, contended that the word `defaulter&#8217; would<br \/>\nbe  understood\tto  be\tthe  person  who  has  incurred\t the<br \/>\nliability.  Though   Radhakrishaniah,  had   undertaken\t the<br \/>\nliability under\t Ex.B-13, for  the purpose  of Section 5, he<br \/>\ncannot be  considered to  be a\tdefaulter, but R. Sankaraiah<br \/>\nwas the\t defaulter;  therefore,\t the  property\thad  by\t the<br \/>\nrespondent at  a partition is not liable to sell. In support<br \/>\nthereof, learned  counsel placed reliance on the judgment of<br \/>\nMadras High  Court in  C. Dhanalakshmi\tAmmal vs. Income-Tax<br \/>\nOfficer, Madras [31 ITR 460]. The facts therein are that the<br \/>\nhusband of  the petitioner  therein  was  the  defaulter  of<br \/>\narrears of income-tax. The property belonged to his wife who<br \/>\nwas sought  to be  proceeded against for recovery of arrears<br \/>\nof income-tax  due by  the assessee, on the premise that the<br \/>\nwife is\t only a benamidar and the real owner of the property<br \/>\nwas the\t husband, the  defaulter. The  Madras High Court had<br \/>\nheld that  since the  husband is the defaulter, the property<br \/>\ncannot be  straightaway proceeded  with since  they stand in<br \/>\nthe name  of the wife, unless appropriate steps are taken to<br \/>\nensure first  that the wife is only a benamidar and the real<br \/>\nowner of  the property\tis the husband. We need not consider<br \/>\nthe correctness\t of the\t view taken by the Madras High Court<br \/>\nfor the reason that the facts therein are entirely different<br \/>\nfrom the facts in this case.\n<\/p>\n<p>     It is  seen that  the property  which is proceeded with<br \/>\nfor recovery  of the debt due to the Government is the joint<br \/>\nfamily property\t charged to  the debt due by Sankaraiah. The<br \/>\nrespondent-Radhakrishaniah had\tundertaken to  discharge the<br \/>\nliability  under   Ex.B-13.  Therefore,\t  he   assumed\t the<br \/>\nresponsibility\tas   a\tdefaulter   under  Section   5.\t  In<br \/>\nconsequence, the  property is  liable to  be proceeded\twith<br \/>\nsince  he  had\tnot  discharged\t that  liability.  The\tsale<br \/>\nconducted on  November 2,  1967, therefore, is in accordance<br \/>\nwith the  provisions of\t the Act.  The sale  certificate was<br \/>\nlegal and  valid. Accordingly, Ex. B-1, the sale certificate<br \/>\ndated April 31, 1961 binds, the second respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The appeal\t is accordingly\t allowed. The  judgments and<br \/>\ndecree of  the High  Court stand  set aside. The suit stands<br \/>\ndismissed. No costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Vemula Siviah Naidu vs State Of A.P. &amp; Anr on 28 November, 1996 Bench: K. Ramaswamy, G.T. Nanavati PETITIONER: VEMULA SIVIAH NAIDU Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF A.P. &amp; ANR. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 28\/11\/1996 BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI ACT: HEADNOTE: JUDGMENT: O R D E R The appellant is the auction-purchaser [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-161630","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Vemula Siviah Naidu vs State Of A.P. &amp; Anr on 28 November, 1996 - 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\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Vemula Siviah Naidu vs State Of A.P. &amp; Anr on 28 November, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996\" \/>\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=\"1996-11-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-04-08T17:41:05+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\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Vemula Siviah Naidu vs State Of A.P. &amp; Anr on 28 November, 1996\",\"datePublished\":\"1996-11-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-08T17:41:05+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996\"},\"wordCount\":930,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996\",\"name\":\"Vemula Siviah Naidu vs State Of A.P. &amp; Anr on 28 November, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1996-11-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-08T17:41:05+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Vemula Siviah Naidu vs State Of A.P. &amp; Anr on 28 November, 1996\"}]},{\"@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":"Vemula Siviah Naidu vs State Of A.P. &amp; Anr on 28 November, 1996 - 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\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Vemula Siviah Naidu vs State Of A.P. &amp; Anr on 28 November, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1996-11-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-04-08T17:41:05+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\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Vemula Siviah Naidu vs State Of A.P. &amp; Anr on 28 November, 1996","datePublished":"1996-11-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-08T17:41:05+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996"},"wordCount":930,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996","name":"Vemula Siviah Naidu vs State Of A.P. &amp; Anr on 28 November, 1996 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1996-11-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-08T17:41:05+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vemula-siviah-naidu-vs-state-of-a-p-anr-on-28-november-1996#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Vemula Siviah Naidu vs State Of A.P. &amp; Anr on 28 November, 1996"}]},{"@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\/161630","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=161630"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/161630\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=161630"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=161630"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=161630"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}