{"id":182627,"date":"2010-12-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-12-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010"},"modified":"2016-06-26T16:40:44","modified_gmt":"2016-06-26T11:10:44","slug":"project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010","title":{"rendered":"Project vs Spl.Laq on 13 December, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Project vs Spl.Laq on 13 December, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Ks Jhaveri,&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\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nFA\/2337\/2002\t 7\/ 7\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nFIRST\nAPPEAL No. 2337 of 2002\n \n\nTo\n\n\n \n\nFIRST\nAPPEAL No. 2338 of 2002\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI\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\nPROJECT\nMANAGER,OIL &amp; NATURAL GAS CORP.LTD. - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSPL.LAQ\nOFFICER &amp; 1 - Defendant(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance : \nMR\nAJAY R MEHTA for\nAppellant(s) : 1, \nGOVERNMENT PLEADER for Defendant(s) : 1, \nMR\nAMIT C NANAVATI for Defendant(s) :\n2, \n=========================================================\n\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 KS JHAVERI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 13\/12\/2010 \n\n \n\nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>\tBoth<br \/>\nthese appeals involve common questions on law and<br \/>\nfacts and therefore, they are disposed of by this common judgment.\n<\/p>\n<p>1.\tThese<br \/>\nappeals have been filed against the judgment and award passed by the<br \/>\nlearned Extra Assistant Judge, Mahesana in Land Acquisition Reference<br \/>\nCase Nos. 2719\/1996 &amp; 2720\/1996 dated 29.06.2001, whereby, the<br \/>\nreferences were partly allowed and the appellant-ONGC was held liable<br \/>\nto pay additional amount of compensation to the original claimants<br \/>\nalong with interest and costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe<br \/>\nfacts in brief are that the competent authority under the Land<br \/>\nAcquisition Act made a proposal for temporary acquisition of the<br \/>\nlands belonging to the respondent-original claimant. After following<br \/>\ndue procedure, the lands came to be acquired. Award came to be passed<br \/>\nby the competent authority fixing the amount of compensation.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tHowever,<br \/>\nbeing dissatisfied with the award, the original claimant raised<br \/>\ndispute, by way of references, after a delay of several years. The<br \/>\nreference Court partly allowed the same by way of the impugned award.<br \/>\nHence, these appeals.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tThe<br \/>\nmain contention raised by the appellant-Corporation is that the<br \/>\nreference Court has not appreciated the law governing the subject,<br \/>\nmore particularly, Section 35 of the Land Acquisition Act in its<br \/>\nproper perspective. It has been submitted that the reference Court<br \/>\nhas also lost sight of several other important factors while awarding<br \/>\nadditional compensation. It is, therefore, submitted that the<br \/>\nimpugned award passed by the reference Court deserves to be quashed<br \/>\nand set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tHeard<br \/>\nlearned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents<br \/>\non record. The issue regarding grant of future rent came up for<br \/>\nconsideration of this Court earlier in a group of appeals being First<br \/>\nAppeal No.792\/2003 &amp; allied matters. The said group of<br \/>\nappeals came to be disposed of by this Court vide judgment and order<br \/>\ndated 21.03.2006. Relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced<br \/>\nhereunder for ready reference;\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;5.2\tOn<br \/>\nthe facts of the case, it is evident that the Reference Court has<br \/>\nalso determined the further rent which issue was not before it. I am,<br \/>\ntherefore, of the opinion that the contention raised by the learned<br \/>\nAdvocate for the appellant that the observation or direction issued<br \/>\nby the Reference Court in the operative part of the orders require to<br \/>\nbe quashed and set aside, is required to be accepted. If the said<br \/>\ndirection is allowed to remain then it would amount to granting the<br \/>\nrent which is over the rent fixed by the appellant-O.N.G.C. from time<br \/>\nto time. Moreover, the same has been fixed without considering as to<br \/>\nwhat would be the future rent fixed by the appellant- O.N.G.C, which<br \/>\nis beyond the scope of reference.  Hence if the said observation is<br \/>\nallowed to remain then, in that event such compensation would be much<br \/>\nmore than the amount which has been found to be adequate by the<br \/>\nCourt.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.3\t It<br \/>\nmay be noted that the Reference Court was dealing with a particular<br \/>\nacquisition and it was not open for the said Court to pass an order<br \/>\nin respect of future rent.  Such an observation on the part of the<br \/>\nReference Court is clearly bad in law in view of the provisions of<br \/>\nSection 35(3) of the Act. In that view of the matter, the<br \/>\nobservations or direction issued by the Reference Court with regard<br \/>\nto additional amount of compensation, requires to be quashed and set<br \/>\naside.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.0\tIn<br \/>\nthe result, these appeals are allowed. The observation &#8220;over<br \/>\nthe rent fixed by O.N.G.C. from time to time with the running<br \/>\ninterest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of due date of running<br \/>\ntill the day of payment is made&#8221;, made by the Reference<br \/>\nCourt in the operative part of the impugned judgments and awards, is<br \/>\nquashed and set aside.  These appeals are allowed to the aforesaid<br \/>\nextent. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent with no order<br \/>\nas to costs.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tFrom<br \/>\nthe above order passed by this Court, it is clear that while<br \/>\nconsidering an application u\/s. 35(3) of the said Act, the reference<br \/>\nCourt is not empowered to pass an order in respect of future rent. In<br \/>\nother words, the reference Court has no jurisdiction to grant<br \/>\nadditional amount of compensation while dealing with an application<br \/>\nu\/s.35(3) of the said Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tLooking<br \/>\nto the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be beneficial to<br \/>\nrefer to a decision of this Court in the case of Oil &amp; Natural<br \/>\nGas Corporation Ltd. v. Sankarji Hemaji, 2008 (2) G.L.R. 1226,<br \/>\nmore particularly, on the observations made in Para-42 therein, which<br \/>\nreads as under;\n<\/p>\n<p>42.<br \/>\n\tFor the reasons stated hereinabove, all the appeals succeed and are<br \/>\n\tallowed with costs which is quantified at Rs.5000 (Rupees Five<br \/>\n\tThousand only) per  each appeal. The impugned common judgement and<br \/>\n\taward dtd. 15\/10\/2005   passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil<br \/>\n\tJudge, Mehsana (Mr.J.R. Shah) in Land Reference Case Nos.3780 to<br \/>\n\t3784 of 2003 is hereby quashed and set aside and it is held that :-\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\treference applications submitted by the original claimants were not<br \/>\n\tmaintainable.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe reference applications<br \/>\n\twere required to be dismissed on the ground of limitation<br \/>\n\tconsidering Article 137 of the Limitation Act. In the alternate, the<br \/>\n\tsame were required to be dismissed on the ground of delay and<br \/>\n\tlaches.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe reference court has no<br \/>\n\tpower, authority, competence and\/or jurisdiction to decide the<br \/>\n\tdispute de-hors the reference made to him.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\treference court has no jurisdiction to decide any other question<br \/>\n\texcept the difference as to sufficiency of compensation in a<br \/>\n\treference under sec.35(3) of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\treference court has no jurisdiction  to declare acquisition<br \/>\n\tproceedings and the award declared by the Special Land Acquisition<br \/>\n\tOfficer under sec.35(3) of the Act as illegal and\/or non-est in a<br \/>\n\treference under sec.35(3) of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\treference court has no jurisdiction to declare possession of the<br \/>\n\tacquiring body  as illegal and\/or unauthorised and consequently the<br \/>\n\treference court has no jurisdiction  to declare the ONGC &#8211;<br \/>\n\tacquiring body as trespasser that too without framing any issue.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\treference court has no jurisdiction to award compensation  by way of<br \/>\n\tmesne profit declaring compensation of the acquiring body as illegal<br \/>\n\tand unauthorised.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\treference court has also no jurisdiction to award statutory benefits<br \/>\n\tand\/or interest, as awarded  by the reference court, as if the<br \/>\n\tacquisition proceedings is a permanent acquisition.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\treference court  has no jurisdiction to determine the dispute with<br \/>\n\tregard to sufficiency of the compensation beyond the period of three<br \/>\n\tyears from the date of  taking the possession.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tReference Court has no jurisdiction to restore the possession of the<br \/>\n\tland to the original owners while deciding the reference under<br \/>\n\tsec.35(3) of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tAs<br \/>\ncan be seen that in the above decision of this Court, it has been<br \/>\ncategorically held that the reference Court has no power to decide<br \/>\nthe dispute de-hors the reference. It has also been further<br \/>\nheld therein that the reference Court cannot restore the possession<br \/>\nof land while deciding the reference u\/s.35(3) of the said Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tOn<br \/>\nthe facts of the present case and in view of the principle laid down<br \/>\nby the Division Bench of this Court in O.N.G.C. v. Sankarji<br \/>\nHemaji&#8217;s case (supra), I am of the view that the impugned award<br \/>\npassed by the reference Court cannot be sustained in the eyes of law,<br \/>\nas the same being illegal and improper, and therefore, it deserves to<br \/>\nbe quashed and set aside. Consequently, the matter requires<br \/>\nreconsideration by the reference Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\tFor<br \/>\nthe foregoing reasons, the appeals are partly allowed. The impugned<br \/>\naward passed by the reference Court is quashed and set aside. The<br \/>\nmatter is remanded to the concerned reference Court for consideration<br \/>\nafresh on merits and also without being influenced by this order, in<br \/>\nview of the principle laid down by this Court in the above decisions.<br \/>\nThe reference Court concerned is directed to dispose of the<br \/>\nreferences expeditiously preferably within a period of two years from<br \/>\nthe date of receipt of writ of this order.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.\tWith<br \/>\nthe above observation and direction, both the appeals stand disposed<br \/>\nof. No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>[K.\n<\/p>\n<p>S. JHAVERI, J.]\t\t<\/p>\n<p>Pravin\/*<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Project vs Spl.Laq on 13 December, 2010 Author: Ks Jhaveri,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print FA\/2337\/2002 7\/ 7 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 2337 of 2002 To FIRST APPEAL No. 2338 of 2002 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ========================================================= 1 [&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-182627","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 v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Project vs Spl.Laq on 13 December, 2010 - 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\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Project vs Spl.Laq on 13 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-12-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-26T11:10:44+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Project vs Spl.Laq on 13 December, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-26T11:10:44+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1373,\"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\\\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010\",\"name\":\"Project vs Spl.Laq on 13 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-26T11:10:44+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Project vs Spl.Laq on 13 December, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Project vs Spl.Laq on 13 December, 2010 - 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\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Project vs Spl.Laq on 13 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-12-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-26T11:10:44+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Project vs Spl.Laq on 13 December, 2010","datePublished":"2010-12-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-26T11:10:44+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010"},"wordCount":1373,"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\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010","name":"Project vs Spl.Laq on 13 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-12-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-26T11:10:44+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/project-vs-spl-laq-on-13-december-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Project vs Spl.Laq on 13 December, 2010"}]},{"@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\/182627","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=182627"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/182627\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=182627"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=182627"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=182627"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}