{"id":171533,"date":"2011-09-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-09-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011"},"modified":"2016-11-15T10:41:52","modified_gmt":"2016-11-15T05:11:52","slug":"ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011","title":{"rendered":"M\/S.Vyas vs By on 6 September, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M\/S.Vyas vs By on 6 September, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: P.B.Majmudar,<\/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\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCRA\/954\/2001\t 1\/ 4\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCIVIL\nREVISION APPLICATION No. 954 of 2001\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE P.B.MAJMUDAR\n \n \n======================================\n \n\n \n\n \n\t  \n\t \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 \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo\n\t\t\tbe referred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \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 \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 \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 \n\n\n \n\nKAMUBEN\nDAHYABHAI KAPADIA \n\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nPRAMODCHANDRA\nSHIVLAL PATEL \n\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\n====================================== \nAppearance\n:\n \n\nM\/S.VYAS\nASSOCIATES for the applicant \nMR BS PATEL for the\nopponent \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 P.B.MAJMUDAR\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 28\/02\/2006 \n\n \n\nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>\tBy<br \/>\nfiling this revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil<br \/>\nProcedure, the petitioner ?  original defendant of Special Civil<br \/>\nSuit No.67 of 2000 has prayed for quashing and setting aside the<br \/>\norder passed by the learned trial Court below Exhibit 13 in Special<br \/>\nCivil Suit No.67 of 2000.\n<\/p>\n<p>2\tThe<br \/>\npetitioner herein is the original defendant of that suit and the said<br \/>\nsuit is filed by original plaintiff, Pramodchandra Shivlal Patel for<br \/>\ngetting decree for specific performance of suit agreement.  In the<br \/>\nsaid suit, the application Exhibit 13 was given by the defendant<br \/>\nunder Order 7 Rule 11(D) of the Code of Civil Procedure for rejecting<br \/>\nthe plaint on the ground that the suit is time-barred and that no<br \/>\nspecific averments have been made in the suit that the plaintiff is<br \/>\nready and willing to perform his part of the contract.\n<\/p>\n<p>3\tIt<br \/>\nis stated by the applicant in his application at Exhibit 13 that as<br \/>\nper the agreement dated 4.5.1992, remaining consideration of<br \/>\nRs.20,000\/- was required to be paid within six months from the date<br \/>\nof the agreement.   It is the say of the applicant that since the<br \/>\nsuit is not filed within the limitation period as per Article 54 of<br \/>\nthe Limitation Act, the plaint is required to be rejected.  It is<br \/>\nalso averred by the applicant in his application that since there is<br \/>\nno specific averment in the plaint that the plaintiff is ready and<br \/>\nwilling to perform his part of the contract, the suit is required to<br \/>\nbe dismissed as it is the mandatory requirement of law to make such<br \/>\naverment in a suit for specific performance.\n<\/p>\n<p>4\tThe<br \/>\nlearned trial Judge after hearing both the sides and after<br \/>\nconsidering the record came to the conclusion that the parties<br \/>\nentered into agreement on 4.5.1992 and looking to the relationship<br \/>\nbetween the parties and considering the fact that since they were<br \/>\nstaying in the same house, at this juncture, it cannot be said that<br \/>\nthe time for executing the sale deed was not extended as according to<br \/>\nthe learned Judge there was a stipulation in the agreement that the<br \/>\ntime for performance of the contract can be extended by mutual<br \/>\nconsent.  The learned trial Judge found that whether the time was<br \/>\nextended or not for the performance of the contract, the Court is<br \/>\nrequired to consider the evidence on record, if led by the parties.<br \/>\nThe Court found that without recording the evidence, at this<br \/>\njuncture, straightaway it is not possible to come to the conclusion<br \/>\nthat the suit is time-barred.   The learned Judge also found that<br \/>\nactual date regarding fixation of the performance of the agreement<br \/>\ncannot be decided without adducing the evidence in the matter.<br \/>\nRegarding the submission of the applicant of Exhibit 13 that the suit<br \/>\nis required to be dismissed for want of averment in the plaint about<br \/>\nthe readiness and willingness to perform the part of the contract is<br \/>\nconcerned, the readiness and willingness cannot be treated as a<br \/>\nstraight jacket formula.   This aspect is required to be considered<br \/>\non the basis of entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case.<br \/>\n The learned trial Judge found that the plaintiff gave a notice to<br \/>\nthe defendant to perform the obligation lies on her part and the same<br \/>\nis also produced along with the suit.  It is also mentioned in the<br \/>\nsame that the plaintiff is and was willing to pay the remaining<br \/>\namount of Rs.25,000\/- of the consideration of sale.   The learned<br \/>\nJudge has found that when the plaintiff has shown his readiness and<br \/>\nwillingness to perform his part of the contract and when the notice<br \/>\nissued by the plaintiff to the defendant was part of the pleadings,<br \/>\non that ground, the suit is not required to be dismissed at threshold<br \/>\nwithout trying the same.  In my view, it cannot be said that the<br \/>\nlearned Judge has committed any error of jurisdiction in passing the<br \/>\nimpugned order.  In its limited jurisdiction under Section 115 of the<br \/>\nCivil Procedure Code this Court is required to see whether any<br \/>\njurisdictional error is committed by the trial Court.   The learned<br \/>\nJudge has rightly found that in view of the decision of the Apex<br \/>\nCourt in the case of  Rameshchandra Chandiol v. Chunnilal Sabartal,<br \/>\nAIR 1971 SC 1238, the readiness and willingness cannot be attributed<br \/>\nas straight-jacket formula and it is to be decided from the facts and<br \/>\ncircumstances of the case.  Considering the aforesaid aspect of the<br \/>\nmatter, no interference of this Court in its revisional exercise of<br \/>\nthe jurisdiction is called for against an interlocutory order of the<br \/>\ntrial Court.  It is, however, clarified that ultimately, at the time<br \/>\nof the deciding the suit the Court shall consider all these points<br \/>\nafter the evidence is available on the record.  The impugned order of<br \/>\nthe trial Court below Exhibit 13 is to be considered only as an order<br \/>\nfor the purpose of deciding the said interim application and the<br \/>\npoints regarding readiness and willingness as well as limitation will<br \/>\nbe decided after framing appropriate issues in this behalf, if such<br \/>\nissues arise out of the pleadings.  The observation of the trial<br \/>\nCourt at the time of passing the order below Exhibit 13 or the<br \/>\nobservations made by this Court in this revision application is to be<br \/>\ntreated only for the purpose of deciding the application Exhibit 13.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn view of<br \/>\nwhat has been stated herein above, the revision application is<br \/>\nrejected.  Rule is discharged.  Interim relief stands vacated.\n<\/p>\n<p>No order as<br \/>\nto costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(P.B.Majmudar,<br \/>\nJ.)<br \/>\n*mohd<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court M\/S.Vyas vs By on 6 September, 2011 Author: P.B.Majmudar, Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CRA\/954\/2001 1\/ 4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION No. 954 of 2001 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.MAJMUDAR ====================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed [&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-171533","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 v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>M\/S.Vyas vs By on 6 September, 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\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S.Vyas vs By on 6 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-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=\"2011-09-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-15T05:11:52+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\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\/S.Vyas vs By on 6 September, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-09-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-15T05:11:52+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011\"},\"wordCount\":928,\"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\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011\",\"name\":\"M\/S.Vyas vs By on 6 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-09-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-15T05:11:52+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\/S.Vyas vs By on 6 September, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"M\/S.Vyas vs By on 6 September, 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\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S.Vyas vs By on 6 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-09-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-15T05:11:52+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\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S.Vyas vs By on 6 September, 2011","datePublished":"2011-09-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-15T05:11:52+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011"},"wordCount":928,"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\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011","name":"M\/S.Vyas vs By on 6 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-09-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-15T05:11:52+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vyas-vs-by-on-6-september-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S.Vyas vs By on 6 September, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/171533","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=171533"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/171533\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=171533"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=171533"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=171533"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}