{"id":167065,"date":"2008-11-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008"},"modified":"2017-07-03T08:03:03","modified_gmt":"2017-07-03T02:33:03","slug":"kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"Kunjamma vs P.J.Kuttappan on 3 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Kunjamma vs P.J.Kuttappan on 3 November, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nFAO.No. 157 of 2008()\n\n\n1. KUNJAMMA, W\/O.SUNDARESAN, VILAYIL\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. SUNDARESHAN, RESIDING AT DO.DO.\n3. KUTTAPPAN, THALUNKAL HOUSE, DO.\n4. RAJANKUTTY, THOTTAKARA HOUSE\n5. THANKAMMA ALIAS CHINNAMMA, DO.DO.\n6. CHELLAPPAN, THOTTAKKARA, PANKUNNAL,\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. P.J.KUTTAPPAN, T.C.3\/321(5),\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. MATHAN, PONKUNNEL HOUSE, PUTHUKKATTU\n\n3. THANBKACHAN, RESIDING AT DO.DO.\n\n4. BABY, RESIDING AT DO.DO.\n\n5. PONNAMMA, VAZHAKALA HOUSE\n\n6. MARY, W\/O.KUNJUMON, MOOLAYIL\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.G.ARUN\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.P.GOPAL\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN\n\n Dated :03\/11\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n                            M.N.KRISHNAN, J\n                        =====================\n                           FAO No.157 OF 2008\n                        =====================\n\n                Dated this the 3rd day of November 2008\n\n                                JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>      This appeal is preferred against the judgment of the Addl.District<\/p>\n<p>Court(Spl.), Kottayam in A.S.No.31 of 2002. The said appeal was preferred<\/p>\n<p>against the judgment and decree of the Munsiff&#8217;s Court, Kanjirappally in<\/p>\n<p>O.S.No.156 of 1999. The trial court dismissed the case of the plaintiffs and<\/p>\n<p>the plaintiffs filed the appeal in which they moved an application for<\/p>\n<p>amendment which was allowed by the appellate court and was remanded<\/p>\n<p>back to the trial court for fresh consideration of the case. It is against the<\/p>\n<p>said order of remand, the FAO is filed before this Court.<\/p>\n<p>      2. The brief facts are necessary to understand the dispute between the<\/p>\n<p>parties. There are 3 items in the plaint schedule property. Item 1 is having a<\/p>\n<p>extent of 1 acre 15 cents of property and item 2 is about 5 cents of property<\/p>\n<p>on the south western portion and item 3 is the building situated in item 2 of<\/p>\n<p>the plaint schedule property. The suit is one for recovery of possession of<\/p>\n<p>item 2 of the plaint schedule property after demolition of the building<\/p>\n<p>situated therein, which is item 3 and for injunction with respect to the<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">FAO 157\/2008                          -:2:-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>remaining portion of item 1 of the plaint schedule property and also for<\/p>\n<p>damages. It is the contention of the plaintiffs that one Kutty and Yohannan<\/p>\n<p>@ Kutty Mooppan were the children of one Azhakan. Plaintiffs are the<\/p>\n<p>children, who are claiming through Yohannan @Kutty Mooppan. The other<\/p>\n<p>son of Azhakan, viz., Kutty had a son, namely Gopidas and a daughter<\/p>\n<p>Aleykutty @ Thankamma. Defendants 4 to 6 are the children of Gopidas<\/p>\n<p>and defendants 1 and 3 are the children of Aleykutty @ Thankamma. The<\/p>\n<p>2nd defendant is the husband of the first defendant. The contention of the<\/p>\n<p>defendants is that they were living along with their grandfather and they had<\/p>\n<p>been in continuous possession of the property and therefore plaintiffs do<\/p>\n<p>not have any right over the plaint schedule property and so they request for<\/p>\n<p>non-suiting the plaintiffs.  The trail court found that item 2 of the plaint<\/p>\n<p>schedule property is not identifiable and therefore refused the prayer with<\/p>\n<p>respect to item 2 and demolition of the building in item 3 and thereafter<\/p>\n<p>further proceeded to hold that the remaining part, viz., item 1 is not proved<\/p>\n<p>to be in possession of the plaintiffs and therefore non-suited the plaintiffs. It<\/p>\n<p>is against that decision the plaintiffs preferred the appeal before the<\/p>\n<p>appellate court.\n<\/p>\n<p>      3. Plaintiffs in the appellate stage moved an application             for<\/p>\n<p>amendment as I.A.No.1582 of 2007. A perusal of the affidavit in support of<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">FAO 157\/2008                         -:3:-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>the said amendment application would reveal that they wanted to amend the<\/p>\n<p>plaint so as to incorporate a prayer for recovery of possession of item 1 of<\/p>\n<p>the plaint schedule property also on the strength of their title. The appellate<\/p>\n<p>court in order to avoid multiplicity of suits and for adjudication of the suits<\/p>\n<p>in an effective manner remanded the case for fresh trial. Aggrieved by that<\/p>\n<p>decision, defendants in the suit have come up with this FAO.<\/p>\n<p>      4. A perusal of the decision of the Apex Court in the decision<\/p>\n<p>reported in <a href=\"\/doc\/541289\/\">Puran Ram v. Bhaguram<\/a>(2008(4) KLT 233(SC) would show<\/p>\n<p>that the courts are having discretion in allowing application for amendment<\/p>\n<p>of plaint even    where the relief sought to be added by amendment is<\/p>\n<p>allegedly barred by limitation. At that stage, no court may be in a position to<\/p>\n<p>find out regarding the actual question whether it is barred by limitation<\/p>\n<p>unless there are admitted facts before a court to render a finding on the<\/p>\n<p>same. Now, it has been the consistent case of the plaintiffs that they were in<\/p>\n<p>possession of the property, viz., item 1 of the plaint schedule property even<\/p>\n<p>on the date of the institution of the suit and according to them the<\/p>\n<p>amendment is necessitated only on account of the finding of the court<\/p>\n<p>below that they are not in possession of the property. So far as item 2 is<\/p>\n<p>concerned, it is their case that defendants had been permitted to put up a<\/p>\n<p>building therein and they had done so and it being only a permissive<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">FAO 157\/2008                        -:4:-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>possession they are entitled to recovery of possession of the property. The<\/p>\n<p>question of limitation is a mixed question of fact and law and when an<\/p>\n<p>application for amendment is allowed, it is necessary to permit the<\/p>\n<p>defendants to file an additional written statement raising all the contentions<\/p>\n<p>which is permissible under law. It is also a settled principle that defendants<\/p>\n<p>in their written statement are even permitted to raise consistent pleas but<\/p>\n<p>ultimately has to choose one at the trial stage. The larger question of<\/p>\n<p>adverse possession or limitation is a matter that will arise for consideration<\/p>\n<p>only when the pleadings are amended and written statement is filed and<\/p>\n<p>issues are raised. So I do not want to further discuss the matter and<\/p>\n<p>express a view so as to shut out the case of either of the parties. I do not<\/p>\n<p>find any ground to interfere with the decision rendered by the District Court<\/p>\n<p>in remanding the case and therefore I dismiss the FAO making it clear that<\/p>\n<p>defendants in the case are permitted to raise all the contentions in their<\/p>\n<p>additional written statement they want to raise which is permissible under<\/p>\n<p>law.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                 M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE<\/p>\n<p>Cdp\/-\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">FAO 157\/2008    -:5:-<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Kunjamma vs P.J.Kuttappan on 3 November, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM FAO.No. 157 of 2008() 1. KUNJAMMA, W\/O.SUNDARESAN, VILAYIL &#8230; Petitioner 2. SUNDARESHAN, RESIDING AT DO.DO. 3. KUTTAPPAN, THALUNKAL HOUSE, DO. 4. RAJANKUTTY, THOTTAKARA HOUSE 5. THANKAMMA ALIAS CHINNAMMA, DO.DO. 6. CHELLAPPAN, THOTTAKKARA, PANKUNNAL, Vs 1. P.J.KUTTAPPAN, T.C.3\/321(5), [&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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-167065","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Kunjamma vs P.J.Kuttappan on 3 November, 2008 - 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\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kunjamma vs P.J.Kuttappan on 3 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-11-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-07-03T02:33:03+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\\\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kunjamma vs P.J.Kuttappan on 3 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-03T02:33:03+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":899,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008\",\"name\":\"Kunjamma vs P.J.Kuttappan on 3 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-03T02:33:03+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kunjamma vs P.J.Kuttappan on 3 November, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Kunjamma vs P.J.Kuttappan on 3 November, 2008 - 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\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kunjamma vs P.J.Kuttappan on 3 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-07-03T02:33:03+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\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kunjamma vs P.J.Kuttappan on 3 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-03T02:33:03+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008"},"wordCount":899,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008","name":"Kunjamma vs P.J.Kuttappan on 3 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-03T02:33:03+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kunjamma-vs-p-j-kuttappan-on-3-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kunjamma vs P.J.Kuttappan on 3 November, 2008"}]},{"@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\/167065","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=167065"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/167065\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=167065"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=167065"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=167065"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}