{"id":169920,"date":"2008-09-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008"},"modified":"2016-10-28T06:08:27","modified_gmt":"2016-10-28T00:38:27","slug":"jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"Jillani vs Bharatiben on 25 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Jillani vs Bharatiben on 25 September, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Akil Kureshi,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\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\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/276220\/2004\t 6\/ 6\tJUDGMENT \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. 2762 of 2004\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nCIVIL\nAPPLICATION No. 14746 of 2007\n \n\nIn\nSPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2762 of 2004\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nJILLANI\nPACKING INDUSTRIES - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nBHARATIBEN\nBHARATKUMAR SANGANI &amp; 1 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nAJ SHASTRI for\nPetitioner(s) : 1, \nNone\nfor Respondent(s) : 1, \nMR\nHM PRACHCHHAK for\nRespondent(s) : 1.2.1,\n1.2.2,1.2.3\n \nMR\nYOGESH S LAKHANI for\nRespondent(s) :\n2, \n=========================================================\n\n\n \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 AKIL KURESHI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 25\/09\/2008 \n\n \n\nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>\tThis<br \/>\npetition is directed against an order dated 28.1.2004 passed by the<br \/>\nlearned Joint Civil Judge (S.D.), Porbandar below Ex.27 and 44 in<br \/>\nSpecial Civil Suit No.119\/02.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe<br \/>\npetitioner is the original plaintiff.  The above suit has been filed<br \/>\nagainst one Shiv Chemicals  (partnership firm) seeking recovery of<br \/>\nRs.4,99,819\/-.  It is the case of the petitioner that during the<br \/>\npendency of the said suit and shortly after the summons  thereof was<br \/>\nserved on the defendants, one of the defendants, namely, Bharatbhai<br \/>\nVrajlal sold his immovable property to Rasilaben.  Eventually, if the<br \/>\ndecree as prayed for is passed in favour of the plaintiff, it may be<br \/>\nnecessary to execute the same   against immovable  property  sold by<br \/>\nBharatbhai.  On this basis, application Ex.44 came to be filed.  In<br \/>\nthe said application, there were two fold prayers made by the<br \/>\nplaintiff.  In para 5(1), it was prayed that other parters of the<br \/>\npartnership be permitted to be joined as co-defendants.  In para<br \/>\n5(2), it was prayed that the subsequent purchaser  of property,<br \/>\nnamely, Rasilalben be also joined as an additional defendant.  By the<br \/>\nimpugned order, the learned Judge though accepted the first prayer,<br \/>\nrefused to join Rasilalben as co-defendant.  It is this portion of<br \/>\nthe order which the petitioner has challenged in the present<br \/>\npetition.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tLearned<br \/>\nadvocate Shri AJ Shastri for the petitioner vehemently submitted that<br \/>\nthe petitioner  has filed the suit for recovery of outstanding   dues<br \/>\nof the partnership.  During the pendency of the suit,   one of the<br \/>\npartners transferred his property to Rasilaben  which transfer would<br \/>\nbe hit by the provisions of sections 52 and 53 of the Transfer of<br \/>\nProperty Act. It was, therefore necessary to join Rasilaben on record<br \/>\nso that if ultimately decree is passed in favour of the plaintiff,<br \/>\nthe same can be executed against the immovable properties of the<br \/>\npartners.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tReliance<br \/>\nwas placed on a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Amit<br \/>\nKumar Shaw  v. Farida Khatoon,<br \/>\nAIR 2005 SC 2209 wherein the Supreme Court observed that under Order<br \/>\n22 Rule 10 of the CPC an alienee  pendente lite may be joined as<br \/>\nparty and the High Court has discretion in the matter which must be<br \/>\njudicially exercised.  It was a case wherein the subsequent purchaser<br \/>\n wished  to be joined as a co-defendant.  It was a reverse case from<br \/>\nthe present one and the observations would therefore not apply<br \/>\ndirectly.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tOn<br \/>\nthe other hand, learned advocate Shri Prachchhak for the concerned<br \/>\nrespondent opposed the petition and contended, inter alia, that the<br \/>\nTrial Court has given cogent reasons for refusing the prayer. No<br \/>\ninterference is therefore called for.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tHaving<br \/>\nheard the learned advocates appearing for the parties, I find that in<br \/>\nthe application Ex.44, the plaintiff did not even aver that transfer<br \/>\nof property was fraudulent or was with a purpose of defeating the<br \/>\njust claim of the plaintiff.  No collusion is alleged between<br \/>\nBharatbhai and Rasilaben.  The plaintiff does not contend that there<br \/>\nis close relation between  two or that the property was sold at an<br \/>\nartificially low price.  Under the circumstances, the question is<br \/>\nwhether mere filing of the suit would automatically be sufficient to<br \/>\nbrand the transaction as fraudulent so as to apply the provisions<br \/>\ncontained in section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tI<br \/>\nam afraid, neither section 52 nor section 53 of the Transfer of<br \/>\nProperty Act would iposo facto<br \/>\napply in the present case.  Section 52 pertains to a situation where<br \/>\nany suit or proceedings in which any right to immovable property is<br \/>\ndirectly and specifically in question.  In the present case, the<br \/>\nimmovable property sold by Bharatbhai to Rasilaben is not the subject<br \/>\nmatter of the suit.  Admittedly, the suit was  filed for recovery of<br \/>\nmoney claim and section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act,<br \/>\ntherefore, would not apply.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tSection<br \/>\n53 of the Transfer of Property Act provides, inter alia, that every<br \/>\ntransfer  of immovable property made with an intent to defeat or<br \/>\ndelay the creditors of the transferor shall be voidable at the option<br \/>\nof the creditor so defeated or delayed.  It specifically provides<br \/>\nthat nothing in the said sub-section would impair the rights of the<br \/>\ntransferee in good faith and for  consideration.  For application of<br \/>\nsection 53, therefore, it would be necessary that transfer of<br \/>\nimmovable property could be with an intent to defeat or delay the<br \/>\ncreditor and in any case, the same would not impair the rights of the<br \/>\ntransferee in good faith and for consideration.  In the present case,<br \/>\nas noted, it is not even averred  by the plaintiff that the transfer<br \/>\nwas made with an intent to defeat or delay the creditor.  It is also<br \/>\nnot contended that the transferee had purchased the property not in<br \/>\ngood faith or not for full consideration.  For mere asking, the<br \/>\nplaintiff cannot  by virtue of pendency of the suit chase a transfer<br \/>\nmade by the defendant in ordinary course of events.  Accepting the<br \/>\ncontention of the petitioner that  in  case of transfer of pendente<br \/>\nlite    the Court should join the transferee and strike down the<br \/>\ntransfer would amount to granting attachment before  judgment the<br \/>\nmoment the suit is filed and would virtually  preclude the defendant<br \/>\nfrom dealing with his properties in ordinary course of business and<br \/>\nwould also gravely jeopardize  the rights and interest  of bonafide<br \/>\npurchasers for value without notice.  To reiterate, in absence of any<br \/>\naverment of intentional transfer to defeat the rights of the creditor<br \/>\nand allegations that the transferee  purchased the property not in<br \/>\ngood faith and not for full consideration, it is not possible to<br \/>\naccept the application of the plaintiff  seeking to join the<br \/>\ntransferee as co-defendant.  The learned Judge in my view did not<br \/>\ncommit any error.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tThe<br \/>\npetition is therefore, dismissed.  Rule is discharged.  Interim<br \/>\nrelief is vacated.  It will be open for the petitioner to request the<br \/>\nlearned Trial Judge for expediting the  pending suit.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tCivil<br \/>\nApplication is also disposed of accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>(Akil Kureshi,  J.)<\/p>\n<p>(vjn)<\/p>\n<p>\t`<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Jillani vs Bharatiben on 25 September, 2008 Author: Akil Kureshi,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/276220\/2004 6\/ 6 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2762 of 2004 With CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14746 of 2007 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2762 of 2004 For [&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-169920","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>Jillani vs Bharatiben on 25 September, 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\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Jillani vs Bharatiben on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-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=\"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-10-28T00:38:27+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\\\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Jillani vs Bharatiben on 25 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-28T00:38:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":997,\"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\\\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008\",\"name\":\"Jillani vs Bharatiben on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-28T00:38:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jillani vs Bharatiben on 25 September, 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":"Jillani vs Bharatiben on 25 September, 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\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Jillani vs Bharatiben on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-10-28T00:38:27+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\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Jillani vs Bharatiben on 25 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-28T00:38:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008"},"wordCount":997,"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\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008","name":"Jillani vs Bharatiben on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-28T00:38:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jillani-vs-bharatiben-on-25-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jillani vs Bharatiben on 25 September, 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\/169920","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=169920"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/169920\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=169920"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=169920"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=169920"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}