{"id":165912,"date":"2011-10-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-10-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011"},"modified":"2018-12-19T01:03:28","modified_gmt":"2018-12-18T19:33:28","slug":"lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011","title":{"rendered":"Lalitaben vs State on 4 October, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Lalitaben vs State on 4 October, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: S.R.Brahmbhatt,<\/div>\n<pre>  \n Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n    \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/14791\/2011\t 7\/ 7\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 14791 of\n2011 \n \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\nLALITABEN\nWD\/O RAMCHANDRA CHAUHAN &amp; 2 - Petitioners\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT &amp; 1 - Respondents\n \n\n=========================================================\nAppearance : \nMR\nUDAYAN P VYAS for\nPetitioners : 1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2,1.2.3  \nMS. ARCHANA C. RAVAL LD. AGP\nfor Respondent : 1 \nNone for Respondent :\n2 \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 04\/10\/2011 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>\tThe petitioners by way<br \/>\n\tof this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India have<br \/>\n\tchallenged the order dated 28.07.1989 passed by the Gujarat Revenue<br \/>\n\tTribunal in Revision Application No. TEN.B.S.490\/87 whereby the<br \/>\n\tGujarat Revenue Tribunal dismissed the Revision Application and<br \/>\n\tconfirmed the order passed by the Deputy Collector in respect of the<br \/>\n\tland in question.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tFacts in brief, as<br \/>\n\tnarrated in the memo of petition indicate that one Ramchandra<br \/>\n\tChauhan, deceased held agricultural lands wherein various survey<br \/>\n\tnumbers admeasuring 48 acres and 32 gunthas in aggregate in<br \/>\n\tvillage-Pardi, Taluka-Kamrej, District-Surat on implementation of<br \/>\n\tGujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, 1960, on appointed day<br \/>\n\tdeceased Ramchandra Chauhan filed Form No.2 in June, 1976,<br \/>\n\tindicating that the land in question was falling within the local<br \/>\n\tarea in Class-C allowing the maximum area of 36 acres of Dry  Crop<br \/>\n\tLand (Jirayat Land) as prescribed in Schedule I and Schedule II of<br \/>\n\tthe Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, 1960.  The family of<br \/>\n\tdeceased Ramchandra Chauhan, at the time of filing Form No.2, was<br \/>\n\tconsisting of self, his wife, minor son, major son and four married<br \/>\n\tdaughters and an unmarried daughter.  Accordingly, the Form No.2 was<br \/>\n\tfiled.  The Mamlatdar and Agricultural Land Tribunal, Kamrej vide<br \/>\n\torder dated 26.03.1982 held that the said deceased Ramchandra<br \/>\n\tChauhan held in aggregate 80 acres and 03 gunthas of equivalent Dry<br \/>\n\tCrop Land and therefore, 8 acres and 03 gunthas of equivalent Dry<br \/>\n\tCrop Land being excess of 72 acres of Dry Crop Land entitled to be<br \/>\n\tretained by said Ramchandra Chauhan was declared to be surplus and<br \/>\n\tordered to be vested in State.  Pursuant to the procedure of right<br \/>\n\tof selection for surrendering the agricultural land, under<br \/>\n\tthe right to elect, the land<br \/>\n\tfor surrendering the Survey Nos. 510 + 513 comprising of Block<br \/>\n\tNo.336 admeasuring about 3<br \/>\n\tacres and 04 gunthas equivalent to 6 acres and 39 gunthas of Dry<br \/>\n\tCrop Land was ordered to be actually vested in the State and the<br \/>\n\tbalance area of 1 acre and 04 gunthas was ordered to be waived by<br \/>\n\tthe State government. As the said portion of land, if taken from out<br \/>\n\tof Survey No.593 comprising in Bolck No.429 would result into<br \/>\n\tfragmentation hit by the law. The order dated 26.03.1982 was passed<br \/>\n\tin Ceiling Case No.67\/1981. The said order was taken in Revision by<br \/>\n\tDeputy Collector, Surat who quashed and set aside the said order and<br \/>\n\tremanded the matter for fresh inquiry.  Upon remand, the Mamlatdar<br \/>\n\tand Agricultural Land Tribunal, Kamrej passed an order on 13.11.1986<br \/>\n\tholding that on account of number of family members being 10, the<br \/>\n\tdeceased in addition to 2 units being one unit for himself and one<br \/>\n\tunit for his major son, was also entitled to get 4\/5th<br \/>\n\tunit and accordingly deceased was said to be entitled to hold land<br \/>\n\tequivalent to Dry Crop Land up to ceiling area of 100 acres. Since<br \/>\n\tthe total area of land equivalent to Dry Crop Land held by deceased<br \/>\n\tRamchandra Chauhan is worked out at 80 acres and 03 gunthas i.e.<br \/>\n\tless than 100 acres of Dry Crop Land to which ceiling permitting no<br \/>\n\tpiece of land was declared as excess<br \/>\n\tor surplus land liable to be vested in State. The order dated<br \/>\n\t13.11.1986 was carried in Revision being Revision Case No.300\/87<br \/>\n\tunder the provisions of Section 37 of the Gujarat Agricultural Lands<br \/>\n\tCeiling Act, 1960 and was quashed vide order dated 23.07.1987 and 3<br \/>\n\tacres and 04 gunthas of land equivalent to 6 acres and 39 gunthas of<br \/>\n\tDry Crop Land from Bolck No. 336 was declared to be liable to be<br \/>\n\tvested in State.  The said order was assailed by filing Revision<br \/>\n\tApplication being Revision Application No. TEN.B.S.490\/87 before<br \/>\n\tGujarat Revenue Tribunal under Section 38 of the Gujarat<br \/>\n\tAgricultural Lands Ceiling Act, 1960.  The said Revision was<br \/>\n\tdismissed, as could be seen from the order dated 28.07.1989, which<br \/>\n\tis impugned in this petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe petitioners have<br \/>\n\tattempted to show reasons belatedly challenging the same being<br \/>\n\tmutation in the revenue record made in the year 2009.  The averments<br \/>\n\tmade in the memo of the petition are, therefore, when the entry came<br \/>\n\tto be made, the petitioners had to challenge the order which was<br \/>\n\tpassed and which has been made basis for mutation of the entry, as<br \/>\n\tthe petitioners&#8217; possession was not disturbed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tLearned advocate for<br \/>\n\tthe petitioners contended that delay in filing this petition is thus<br \/>\n\tsufficiently explained and factum of possession could be said to be<br \/>\n\ta valid ground for assailing the order, as though there was an order<br \/>\n\tof Tribunal way back in the year 1989.  The possession had not been<br \/>\n\tdisturbed and the entry, which is sought to be made for the first<br \/>\n\ttime in respect of excess land came to be certified only on<br \/>\n\t14.07.2009.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tLearned advocate for<br \/>\n\tthe petitioners invited this Court&#8217;s attention to the observation<br \/>\n\tmade by the Tribunal while rejecting the Revision Application and<br \/>\n\tsubmitted that the order passed by the competent authority holding<br \/>\n\tthat the petitioner&#8217;s ancestors were entitled originally to hold 100<br \/>\n\tacres of land as prescribed and the original hold was less than 100<br \/>\n\tacres. There was no requirement of any further disturbance. The<br \/>\n\torder dated 28.07.1989 passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in<br \/>\n\tRevision Application No. TEN.B.S.490\/87 being illegal and is<br \/>\n\trequired to be set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThis Court is unable to<br \/>\n\taccept the submission of learned advocate for the petitioners for<br \/>\n\tthe following reasons.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe<br \/>\n\tCourt is not convinced with regard to the explanation tendered for<br \/>\n\tbelatedly challenging the order made on 28.07.1989. The fact remains<br \/>\n\tto be noted that all the present petitioners were party in the<br \/>\n\tRevision Application and the Revision Application was filed by them.<br \/>\n\tWhen the Revision Application was filed by them, naturally it is<br \/>\n\texpected of the petitioners or the applicants to pursue the same to<br \/>\n\tits logical end. Mere statement with regard to their inquiring with<br \/>\n\tthe advocate concerned and advocate informing them that the Revision<br \/>\n\tis pending, is itself not sufficient to inspire confidence of this<br \/>\n\tCourt warranting condonation of delay, which is sizable in the<br \/>\n\tinstant case. The petitioners have not produced any other material<br \/>\n\tor appropriate averment to indicate that the petitioners were not<br \/>\n\taware about passing of the order dated 28.07.1989.  The delay,<br \/>\n\ttherefore, in my view is so gross as to disentitle the petitioners<br \/>\n\tto seek any relief from this Court under Article 227 of the<br \/>\n\tConstitution of India. The Court is though not convinced with regard<br \/>\n\tto the ground of delay and is also not convinced with<br \/>\n\tregard to the lack of merits in the order impugned in this petition.<br \/>\n\tThe petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India<br \/>\n\tand, therefore, the Court needs to be mindful of the fact that the<br \/>\n\tjurisdiction to be exercised under Article 227 of the Constitution<br \/>\n\tof India is a very limited jurisdiction confined to the patent<br \/>\n\tillegality and\/or gross injustice. In the instant case, the findings<br \/>\n\trecorded by the Tribunal while rejecting the Revision Application,<br \/>\n\tin my view cannot be said to have brought about<br \/>\n\tany of the result mentioned hereinabove.  Hence, it does not call<br \/>\n\tfor any interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.<br \/>\n\t The petition, thus being bereft of merits, deserves rejection and<br \/>\n\tis accordingly rejected, however, there shall be not order as to<br \/>\n\tcosts.\n<\/p>\n<p>(S.R.BRAHMBHATT,<br \/>\n\tJ.)<\/p>\n<p>Pankaj<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Lalitaben vs State on 4 October, 2011 Author: S.R.Brahmbhatt, Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/14791\/2011 7\/ 7 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14791 of 2011 ========================================================= LALITABEN WD\/O RAMCHANDRA CHAUHAN &amp; 2 &#8211; Petitioners Versus STATE OF GUJARAT &amp; 1 &#8211; Respondents [&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":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-165912","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Lalitaben vs State on 4 October, 2011 - 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\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Lalitaben vs State on 4 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-10-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-12-18T19:33:28+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\\\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Lalitaben vs State on 4 October, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-10-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-18T19:33:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1194,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011\",\"name\":\"Lalitaben vs State on 4 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-10-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-18T19:33:28+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Lalitaben vs State on 4 October, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"Lalitaben vs State on 4 October, 2011 - 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\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Lalitaben vs State on 4 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-10-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-12-18T19:33:28+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\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Lalitaben vs State on 4 October, 2011","datePublished":"2011-10-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-18T19:33:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011"},"wordCount":1194,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011","name":"Lalitaben vs State on 4 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-10-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-18T19:33:28+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/lalitaben-vs-state-on-4-october-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Lalitaben vs State on 4 October, 2011"}]},{"@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\/165912","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=165912"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/165912\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=165912"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=165912"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=165912"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}