{"id":167761,"date":"1973-03-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1973-03-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973"},"modified":"2018-05-12T00:10:00","modified_gmt":"2018-05-11T18:40:00","slug":"abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973","title":{"rendered":"Abdul Majid vs Harbansh Chaube And Ors. on 29 March, 1973"},"content":{"rendered":"
Allahabad High Court<\/div>\n
Abdul Majid vs Harbansh Chaube And Ors. on 29 March, 1973<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: AIR 1974 All 129<\/div>\n
Author: T Misra<\/div>\n
Bench: T Misra<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
 T.S. Misra, J. <\/p>\n
1.     This  is  an  appeal  by the defendant.   It arises in the following circumstances.\n<\/p>\n
2. A dacoity took place at the house of Ali Raza in village Bankata, P.S. Raunapar in the night of July 21\/22. 1949. The plaintiff was prosecuted in that case under Section 412, Indian Penal Code for being found in possession of a ‘hansuli’ alleged to be belonging to Ali Raza on the charge-sheet submitted by the defendant No. 1 against him. The defendant No. 1 submitted a search memo in the capacity of Station Officer, P.S. Raunapar. The defendants Nos. 2 and 3 were search witnesses. The plaintiff was ultimately acquitted by the Court of Session on 9th October, 1950. Thereafter the plaintiff gave a notice to the defendant No. 1 under Section 80 Civil Procedure Code, which was, however, returned refused by the defendant No. 1. The plaintiff thereupon filed a suit for damages on the ground of malicious prosecution claiming a sum of Rs. 1000.00 from the defendants Nos. 1, 2 and 3. It was alleged by the plaintiff that one Amir Singh and the defendants Nos. 2 and 3 were his enemies and were plotting and conspiring to cause harm to him by various ways. With that end in view and taking unlawful advantage of the dacoity which took place at the house of Ali Raza, the defendants Nos. 2 and 3 conspired together to falsely implicate him as an accused under Section 412, Indian Penal Code in the said dacoity case. The defendant No. 1 also joined hands with the defendants Nos. 2 and 3 to secure that object. The plaintiff alleged that he neither participated in the said dacoity nor received any stolen property but he was maliciously and without any reasonable and probable cause, prosecuted by the defendants. He alleged that the defendant No. 1 who was then the Station Officer P.S. Raunapar, kept him illegally detained in lock up for a day and then challaned him as an accused in the aforeaid dacoity case. As none could identify the plaintiff in the identification parade, the defendants and Amir Singh cooked up another case to keep the plaintiff entangled in the dacoity case by falsely implicating him in the case under Section 412, Indian Penal Code. The plaintiff further alleged that the defendant No. 1 prepared a false and totally wrong sketch map of the plaintiffs house. He never made any search of the house of the plaintiff and the alleged “hansuli’ was not recovered from his house. The suit was contested by the defendants.\n<\/p>\n
The defendant No. 1 contended that he started a case under Section 412, Indian Penal Code against the plaintiff in a bona fide manner and pleaded that the plaintiff was prosecuted on the strength of the investigation made by him. He further alleged that he had made a search of the house of the plaintiff in connection with the dacoity which had taken place at the house of All Raza and had recovered a ‘hansuli’. The allegations of the plaintiff to the contrary were denied by him. The defendant No. 1 denied the receipt of the notice under Section 30, Civil Procedure Code and pleaded bur of Section 42 of Police Act and Limitation Act, The defendants Nos. 2 and 3 supported the case of the defendant No. 1 and alleged that a search of the plaintiff’s house did take place in their presence and they were not liable for any damages. The trial Court repelled all the contentions raised by the defendants and held that the plaintiff was maliciously prosecuted by the defendants without any reasonable and probable cause. It accordingly decreed the suit for damages to the tune of Rs. 1,000.00. The defendants preferred an appeal from the said decree. The Appellate Court below on a consideration of the evidence on the record and surrounding circumstances affirmed the findings recorded by the trial Court and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved, the defendant No. 1 preferred the second appeal No. 293 of 1965 whereas the defendants Nos. 2 and 3 filed a Second Appeal No. 3633 of 1964. Both the appeals were ordered to be connected and to be heard together.\n<\/p>\n
3. The Appeal No. 3633 of 1964 was filed by Deo Saran Chaube and Moti Chaube. DeO Saran Chaube died during the pendency of the appeal. His heirs and legal representatives filed an application for being substituted in place of the deceased Appellant No. 1. Notice of that application for substitution had, however, not been served either on the plaintiff respondent No. 1 or on the defendant respondent No. 2. The application for substitution was thereafter dismissed for not taking steps and the appeal abated so far as Appellant No. 1 was concerned. None appeared on behalf of Moti Chaube, Appellant No. 2 to press second Appeal No. 3633 of 1964. Consequently the Appeal No. 3633 of 1964 must fail.\n<\/p>\n
4.       In     Second     Appeal  No.   293   of 1965, the learned Counsel for the appellant urged that there was no proof that the defendant No. 1 was actuated by malice in prosecuting   the  plaintiff   in   the   aforesaid   case and therefore no decree for damages on the ground  of malicious     prosecution  could  be passed against  him.    It is  by now well settled that in order to succeed in an action for malicious   prosecution,     the   plaintiff  has  to prove (1) that there was want of reasonable and  probable cause  for the  prosecution,  (2) that the proceedings were initiated in a malicious spirit and (3) that the plaintiff was acquitted. Malice is said to mean any wrong or indirect    motive.     If  the  proceedings     were initiated  from  an  indirect  or  wrong  motive and   not   in   furtherance of justice it would be  said  that  the   defendant  was  malicious; there  need   not   necessarily   be  a   feeling   of enmity, spite or ill-will.    Want of reasonable and,  probable cause and existence of malice must however, concur in order to constitute the     wrong   of   malicious     prosecution.   Absence  of reasonable cause  owing to  the  defendant’s want of belief in the truth  of his charge would    be evidence of malice. It appears  from    Ex.   1    that Harbans     Chaube, the plaintiff was given the benefit of doubt by   the   Sessions   Judge   and   was   acquitted. The  appellate  court  below  on   a  consideration  of  the  evidence  both  documentary  and oral as well as the circumstances of the case came to the conclusion that no search of the house of the     plaintiff was ever made  and everything   against   him   was   concocted   by the defendant No.  1 in    conspiracy with the defendants   Nos.  2  and  3  and  Amir   Singh. The action of the defendant No. 1 was also mala fide. The defendants Nos. 2 and 3 were not  only witnesses  but were  actual prosecutors  of the  plaintiff.  The  defendant  No.   1 also  took  active  part  in   the  prosecution   of the  plaintiff.   He was the  man  who  set  the law into  motion   against  the plaintiff.  These findings   are   based   on   the   appreciation   of evidence.   Sufficiency   or   adequacy   of   evidence  to     support    a  finding  of fact  is    a matter of decision of court of facts and cannot be    agitated    in a second appeal     (See Madamanchi   Ramappa   v.   Muthaiuru   Bojjappa, AIR<\/a>  1963 SC  1633).\n<\/p>\n
5. The learned counsel for the appellant, however, urged that the appellate court below arrived at those findings by considering some evidence which was inadmissible and therefore the whole finding is vitiated. In this connection he referred to that portion of the judgment of the appellate court below where reliance was placed on the statement of Mst. Kabutari. It appears that she was produced as a witness for the prosecution before the Sessions Judge to prove that hansuli said to have been recovered from the house of the plaintiff belonged to Ali Raza. She had admitted in the court of sessions that she was not in a position to tell whether Hansuli, Ex. 2 was the same which her husband had sold to AH Raza. A certified copy of her statement made before the Sessions Judge was  filed  In  the   suit  which  has  given  rise to the present appeal and the appellate court below referred to that statement of Mst. Kabutari and observed that even from her statement, it was clear that the plaintiff’s house was not searched by the defendant No. 1 at the time and date allowed and the alleged hansuli was not recovered from the plaintiff’s house. It is true that the certified copy of the statement of Mst. Kabutari has not established that she was dead or could not be found or her presence could not be obtained without an amount of delay or expenses which under the circumstances of the case the court considered unreasonable. It may, however, be noticed that the statement of Kabutari was not the only evidence on which the appellate court below relied to come to the conclusion that no search of the house of the plaintiff was ever made by the defendant No. 1 and that the hansuli was not recovered from the plaintiffs house. On the other hand, the appellate court below made a careful scrutiny of the entire evidence both oral and documentary to come to that conclusion. In view of the clear findings on fact recorded by the courts below that that no search of the house of the plaintiff was ever made and everything against him was concocted in conspiracy with the defendants Nos. 2 and 3 and Amir Singh and that the defendant No. 1 took active part in the prosecution of the plaintiff clearly made out that the defendant No. 1 was actuated by wrong or indirect motive to prosecute the plaintiff.\n<\/p>\n
        6. The learned coursel then urged that the plaintiff failed to establish that the prosecution was without reasonable and probable cause. I find no merits in this contention. As indicated above the courts below have found that everything against the plaintiff was concocted by the defendant No. 1 in conspiracy with defendants Nos. 2 and 3 and Amir Singh and that no search, of the house of the plaintiff was made and that the article in question was not recovered from his place. There was, therefore no reasonable and probable cause for the defendant No. 1 to prosecute the plaintiff.\n<\/p>\n
7. The learned counsel for the appellant further argued that the plaintiff was given benefit of doubt by the Sessions Judge and, therefore, it was not a case of clean acquittal. This contention has also no merits. The fact remains that the plaintiff was acquitted of the charges. The fact also remains that the plaintiff was prosecuted. The Civil Court had in the suit which pave rise to the present appeal, to examine the evidence on the record and to come to its own conclusion whether there was any reasonable or probable cause for the defendants to prosecute the plaintiff. Both the courts below after examining the evidence adduced by the parties recorded a finding that there was no reasonable and probable cause for the prosecution of the plaintiff and that the whole thing was concocted.\n<\/p>\n
8.       The learned    Counsel for the appellant laid great stress on  the plea of limitation   raised  by  the  defendant  No.   1.    He submitted that Article 2 of the Indian Limitation Act 1908 was applicable.    There is no merit  in   this  submission.     Article  2  of  the Limitation Act dealt with the suits for compensation   for  doing  or  for  omitting  to  do an   act   alleged  to  be  in  pursuance  of any enactment   in   force   for   the   time   being   in India, whereas Article 23  dealt with the suit for   compensation   for   a   malicious   prosecution.    A  claim  in respect     of compensation for   malicious   prosecution   would   fall   under Article 23 which was the more specific Article  and  not  under Article  2  which   applied to  cases   where  the     defendant acted  under colour  of  statute.\n<\/p>\n
9. In the present case it was found that the prosecution of the plaintiff ended in his acquittal on 9-10-1950. The suit for damages for malicious prosecution could be filed only thereafter. The plaintiff filed the suit on 14-8-1951, that is, within one year, hence it was not barred by time.\n<\/p>\n
10. No other point was urged on behalf of the appellant. This appeal must also, therefore, fail.\n<\/p>\n
11. In the result both the appeals Nos. 293 of 1965 and 3633 of 1964 arc dismissed. The plaintiff respondent shall be entitled to his costs in both the appeals.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Allahabad High Court Abdul Majid vs Harbansh Chaube And Ors. on 29 March, 1973 Equivalent citations: AIR 1974 All 129 Author: T Misra Bench: T Misra JUDGMENT T.S. Misra, J. 1. This is an appeal by the defendant. It arises in the following circumstances. 2. A dacoity took place at the house of Ali Raza […]<\/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":[9,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-167761","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allahabad-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAbdul Majid vs Harbansh Chaube And Ors. on 29 March, 1973 - 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\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Abdul Majid vs Harbansh Chaube And Ors. on 29 March, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973\" \/>\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=\"1973-03-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-11T18:40:00+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Abdul Majid vs Harbansh Chaube And Ors. on 29 March, 1973\",\"datePublished\":\"1973-03-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-11T18:40:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973\"},\"wordCount\":2014,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Allahabad High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973\",\"name\":\"Abdul Majid vs Harbansh Chaube And Ors. on 29 March, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1973-03-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-11T18:40:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Abdul Majid vs Harbansh Chaube And Ors. on 29 March, 1973\"}]},{\"@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":"Abdul Majid vs Harbansh Chaube And Ors. on 29 March, 1973 - 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\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Abdul Majid vs Harbansh Chaube And Ors. on 29 March, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1973-03-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-11T18:40:00+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Abdul Majid vs Harbansh Chaube And Ors. on 29 March, 1973","datePublished":"1973-03-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-11T18:40:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973"},"wordCount":2014,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Allahabad High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973","name":"Abdul Majid vs Harbansh Chaube And Ors. on 29 March, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1973-03-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-11T18:40:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/abdul-majid-vs-harbansh-chaube-and-ors-on-29-march-1973#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Abdul Majid vs Harbansh Chaube And Ors. on 29 March, 1973"}]},{"@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\/167761","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=167761"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/167761\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=167761"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=167761"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=167761"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}