{"id":177801,"date":"2008-12-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-12-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008"},"modified":"2015-05-21T18:24:41","modified_gmt":"2015-05-21T12:54:41","slug":"radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008","title":{"rendered":"Radha vs Minor Udhayaraj on 10 December, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
Radha vs Minor Udhayaraj on 10 December, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDated  :    10.12.2008\n\nCoram\n\nThe Honourable Mr.Justice S.RAJESWARAN\n\nC.R.P.(PD)No.479 of 2008\nin \nM.P.No.1 of 2008\n\n \nRadha                                                         ...    Petitioner                                                                       \n                                                           \n               \nVs.\n \n \n1.Minor Udhayaraj\n2.Minor Saran Raj\n   Both are rep. by their\n   father and Guardian Chandru.\n\n3.The Correspondent,\n   Needamangalam Higher Secondary School,\n   Needamangalam Town and Taluk,\n   Thiruvarur.\n\n4.The Chief  Educational Officer,\n   O\/o.The Chief Educational Officer,\n   Pallivasal Street, \n   Thiruvarur Town & Taluk and District,\n\n5.The District Educational Officer, \n   O\/o.District Educational Officer,\n   Ellaiamman Koil Street,\n   Thiruvarur Town, Taluk & District.\n\n6.The District Collector,\n   Thiruvarur.                                                ...   Respondents                                                                 \n                                                                            \n\tThis Civil Revision Petition has been filed  under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the Order dated 05.09.2007 in Pauper O.P.No.134 of 2006  on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Mannargudi. \n\n                    For Petitioner      :   Mr.M.Balasubramanian \n\n\t\t    For Respondents :    Mr.M.Thamizhavel for R.1&2 \n\n                                        O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
\tThis Civil Revision Petition has been filed  by the petitioner herein\/first respondent in Pauper O.P.No.134 of 2006  to set aside the Order dated 05.09.2007 in Pauper O.P.No.134 of 2006  on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Mannargudi.\n<\/p>\n
\t2.  The first respondent in Pauper O.P.No.134 of 2006 is the revision petitioner herein.  Pauper O.P.No.134 of 2006 has been filed by the respondents 1 & 2 herein, represented by their father, for permitting them to sue as an indigent person; directing the Headmaster and the Correspondent of Needamangalam  Higher Secondary School(respondents 1 & 2 in the OP)  to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000\/-  towards compensation and also for costs.\n<\/p>\n
\t3. The CEO, DEO and the District Collector are arrayed as respondents 3 to 5 in Pauper O.P.No.134 of 2006.\n<\/p>\n
\t4.  The respondents 1 and 2  herein have stated that  they are indigent persons and they do not have any other property except what was shown in the petition.  The said petition was resisted by the revision petitioner herein and the third respondent herein by filing a counter.  They stated that the respondents 1 and 2 herein are not indigent persons and their father, Thiru.Chandru was an employee of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Kumbakonam, Division-I and he was drawing a salary of Rs.7,000\/- per month.  From that salary, he made good savings and thereafter, voluntarily  retired from the services of the corporation.  At the time of his retirement, he received a sum of Rs.70,000\/- towards the gratuity and Rs.50,000\/- towards the Provident Fund. He also contested for the Panchayat Union Elections and hence he has got sufficient funds to file the Court fee.  It is further stated in the counter that he has a house of his own, which was suppressed by him.\n<\/p>\n
\t5.  At the time of enquiry, it was stated by the father of the respondents 1 and 2 herein that, he was employed as a driver with the Transport Corporation and he was getting  a monthly salary of Rs.5,000\/- .  On 08.03.2000, the bus driven by him met with an accident and his right hand and leg were injured in that accident. Due to the injuries suffered by him, he could not continue his job as driver and as the Corporation did not come forward to give alternative employment, he resigned his post.  The Corporation did not pay him any terminal benefits by stating that unless he paid the amount for the damages caused to the bus involved in the accident, no amount would be given to him. Therefore, he did not receive any amount from the Corporation at the time of leaving his job. During his cross examination, the father of the respondents 1 and 2 herein deposed that he is getting only a sum of Rs.80\/- per day as wages and he did not own any lands.  Further, he admitted in the cross examination that, he has got one thatched house and the value of the same will come to Rs.10,000\/- to Rs.15,000\/- approximately.  He further stated that as he is a member of the Indian Communist Party, the party spent for the election expenses and therefore, he did not know anything about the expenses occurred  during elections.\n<\/p>\n
\t6. The trial Court by order dated 05.09.2007, after finding that the father of the respondents 1 and 2 admitted in the cross examination that he has got a thatched house and the same was not disclosed in the petition, permitted the respondents 1 and 2 to amend the plaint to include that property i.e., the thatched house to find out whether the respondents 1 and 2 are the indigent persons or not.\n<\/p>\n
\t7.  Aggrieved by the order of the trial Court dated 05.09.2007, the above civil revision petition has been filed by the first respondent in O.P.No.134 of 2006  under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.\n<\/p>\n
\t8.  Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents 1 & 2.  I have also gone through the documents filed in support of their submissions.\n<\/p>\n
\t9.  The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that the trial Court has committed an illegality in permitting the respondents 1 and 2 to amend the petition to include the suppressed property and the trial Court ought to have dismissed the petition once it was established that  the respondents 1 and 2 suppressed the property owned by them in the petition.\n<\/p>\n
\t10.  Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 submits that the civil revision petition itself was filed belatedly and in the meantime, application in I.A.No.69 of 2007 was filed for amending the petition filed in P.O.P.No.134 of 2006 and the same was allowed by the trial Court on 06.11.2007.  Without challenging that order, the revision petitioner has only challenged the previous order dated 05.09.2007 and  therefore, the civil revision petition is to be dismissed as infructuous.  He further submits that no objection could be taken  to the order of the trial Court dated 05.09.2007, permitting the respondents 1 and 2 herein to amend the POP.No.134 of 2006 and in fact, no orders are passed yet in the  POP.No.134 of 2006, either permitting the respondents 1 and 2  to sue as indigent persons or rejecting the petition filed by them.  Therefore, according to the learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2, the civil revision petition has been filed in a premature stage and the same is to be dismissed,<\/p>\n
\t11. I have considered the rival submissions carefully.\n<\/p>\n
\t12. It is not in dispute that in the cross examination, the father of the respondent 1 and 2 admitted that he has got a thatched house and the value of the thatched house will come to approximately Rs.10,000\/- to Rs.15,000\/-. It is also an admitted fact that this property was not disclosed in the petition filed in POP.No.134 of 2006.\n<\/p>\n
\t13.  Now, the question that arises for consideration is, whether the trial Court is right in permitting the respondents 1 and 2 to amend the petition to include the thatched house in the schedule of property or the trial Court ought to have dismissed the petition in limini for not showing the thatched house in the schedule of property.\n<\/p>\n
\t14.  I am of the considered view that in such circumstances, the trial Court instead of dismissing the petition, should give an opportunity to include that property also in the petition filed under Order 32 Rule 2 and to conduct an enquiry to find out whether the respondents 1 and 2 are indigent persons or not.  Therefore, I am in agreement with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 that, the trial Court has not yet decided the issue and the civil revision petition has been filed at a premature stage.  That apart, subsequent to the order passed by the trial Court on 05.09.2007, an application has been filed by the respondents 1 and 2 in I.A.No.69 of 2007 to amend POP.No.134 of 2006, which was  resisted by the revision petitioner by filing a counter.  The trial Court by order dated 06.11.2007, allowed the application. It is an admitted fact that the order dated 06.11.2007 was not at all challenged by the revision petitioner even though the civil revision petition was filed on 11.12.2007. That apart, after the I.A. was allowed, the amendment was carried out, again the father of the respondents 1 and 2 herein was called for and he already continued his chief examination on 04.02.2008.\n<\/p>\n
         15.  In the light of the above facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the trial Court on 05.09.2007 and accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed. No Costs.  Consequently, connected M.P.No.1 of 2008 is also dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
rrg<\/p>\n
To
\nThe Subordinate Judge,
\nMannargudi<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court Radha vs Minor Udhayaraj on 10 December, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 10.12.2008 Coram The Honourable Mr.Justice S.RAJESWARAN C.R.P.(PD)No.479 of 2008 in M.P.No.1 of 2008 Radha … Petitioner Vs. 1.Minor Udhayaraj 2.Minor Saran Raj Both are rep. by their father and Guardian Chandru. 3.The Correspondent, Needamangalam […]<\/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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-177801","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nRadha vs Minor Udhayaraj on 10 December, 2008 - 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\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Radha vs Minor Udhayaraj on 10 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-12-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-05-21T12:54:41+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Radha vs Minor Udhayaraj on 10 December, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-21T12:54:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1263,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008\",\"name\":\"Radha vs Minor Udhayaraj on 10 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-21T12:54:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Radha vs Minor Udhayaraj on 10 December, 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":"Radha vs Minor Udhayaraj on 10 December, 2008 - 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\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Radha vs Minor Udhayaraj on 10 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-12-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-05-21T12:54:41+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Radha vs Minor Udhayaraj on 10 December, 2008","datePublished":"2008-12-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-21T12:54:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008"},"wordCount":1263,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008","name":"Radha vs Minor Udhayaraj on 10 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-12-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-21T12:54:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/radha-vs-minor-udhayaraj-on-10-december-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Radha vs Minor Udhayaraj on 10 December, 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\/177801","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=177801"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/177801\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=177801"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=177801"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=177801"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}