{"id":183636,"date":"2009-04-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-04-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009"},"modified":"2017-12-22T06:46:08","modified_gmt":"2017-12-22T01:16:08","slug":"mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009","title":{"rendered":"Mazid vs Smt. Raj Kanwar &amp; Ors on 28 April, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Rajasthan High Court &#8211; Jodhpur<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Mazid vs Smt. Raj Kanwar &amp; Ors on 28 April, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>CMA 248\/1989 -Mazid Vs. Smt. Raj Kunwar &amp; Ors.                 Judgment dt.28.4.09\n\n\n\n                                          1\/6\n\n\n               S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.248\/1989\n                  Mazid Vs. Smt. Raj Kunwar &amp; Ors.\n\nDate of order                         :             28th April, 2009\n\n                                   PRESENT\n\n            HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI\n\nMr. R.K. Purohit for Mr. L.R. Mehta for the appellant-owner.\nMr. P.K. Bhansali for the respondent - Insurer Company..\nMr. G.Vaishnav, for the claimants.\n\n                                          -----\n\n1.             Heard learned counsels.\n\n\n\n2.             This appeal has been filed by one Shri Mazid owner of\n\nthe vehicle namely Truck No.RJG 2771 being aggrieved by the\n\nimpugned award of MACT, Chittorgarh deciding MACT Case\n\nNo.148\/1988 vide order dated 10.8.1989 whereby the learned\n\nTribunal held that the respondent No.3, United India Insurance\n\nCompany would be liable to pay the compensation to the claimants in\n\nrespect of death of one Bhim Singh to the extent of Rs.50,000\/- and\n\nthe balance compensation of this Rs.50,800\/- would be payable by the\n\nowner and driver of the vehicle.                  The total compensation of\n\nRs.1,00,800\/- was awarded by the Tribunal on account of death of\n\nBhim Singh in an accident which took place on 18.4.1986 while the\n\nsaid Bhim Singh along with one Moti Singh were returning back from\n\nBhilwara after emptying the goods (Bhusa) at Bhilwara and while the\n\nsaid truck reached Railway crossing, it collided with another tanker\n CMA 248\/1989 -Mazid Vs. Smt. Raj Kunwar &amp; Ors.         Judgment dt.28.4.09\n\n\n\n                                         2\/6\n\n\nfrom back side on account of rash and negligent driving by the\n\nrespondent No.2 Ramswaroop and on account of said accident, said\n\nperson Bhim Singh died.\n\n\n\n3.             The Tribunal after recording evidence of the parties\n\nawarded a compensation of Rs.1,00,800\/- in favour of the claimants\n\nand directed its payment as aforesaid.\n\n\n\n4.             Being aggrieved of the said award, the owner has\n\napproached this Court by way of present appeal to the extent of\n\ndirections of the Tribunal for part payment of compensation by him.\n\n5.             The respondent Insurance Company has also filed cross-\n\nobjections this Court on 15.11.1989 as also the claimants.\n\n\n\n6.             Mr. R.K. Purohit, learned counsel for the appellant\n\nowner of the vehicle submitted that the owner has also filed the copy\n\nof insurance cover note along with the application under Order 41\n\nRule 27 C.P.C. which shows that the vehicle in question was covered\n\nfor the period 15th January, 1986 to 14th January, 1987 with the\n\nfollowing premiums totaling of Rs.474\/- which was paid by the\n\nowner to the insurance company :-\n\nBP                     240.00\nAdd Driver \/ cleaner    16.00\nAdd 4 labour            32.00\nAdd 4 NF PP             36.00\nUnlimited Per Inj prop\n CMA 248\/1989 -Mazid Vs. Smt. Raj Kunwar &amp; Ors.           Judgment dt.28.4.09\n\n\n\n                                           3\/6\n\n\nDamages Rs.3,00,000            150.00\n                              ----------\n                               474.00\n\n\n\n7.             He further submitted that the Tribunal has arrived at the\n\nfinding of fact on the basis of evidence that said Bhim Singh along\n\nwith PW 3 Moti Singh had hired the said vehicle for carrying goods\n\nand on the date of accident also they were carrying the goods and\n\nafter emptying the goods at Bhilwara, they were proceedings further\n\nto load other goods and, therefore, the deceased Bhim Singh cannot\n\nbe said to be a gratuitous passenger in the said goods vehicle and,\n\ntherefore, the insurance company was fully liable to pay the\n\ncompensation awarded by the Tribunal by the impugned award and\n\nthe liability could not be fastened upon the owner of the vehicle.\n\n\n\n8.             On the side opposite, Mr. P.K. Bhansali, learned counsel\n\nappearing for the Insurance company urged relying upon the\n\ndecisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Oriental\n\nInsurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sudhakaran K.V. &amp; Ors. - 2008(2) RLW\n\n1680 (SC), Mallawwa &amp; Ors. Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. And\n\nors. - 1999 ACJ 1 and the decision of Himacha Pradesh High Court in\n\ncase of United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Hiralal &amp; Ors. - 2007\n\nACJ 1398 and submitted that the said deceased Bhim Singh could not\n\nbe said to be the owner of the goods accompanying along with the\n\ngoods in vehicle as admittedly the goods in question had been\n CMA 248\/1989 -Mazid Vs. Smt. Raj Kunwar &amp; Ors.                Judgment dt.28.4.09\n\n\n\n                                         4\/6\n\n\nemptied at Bhilwara and empty truck was returning back from the\n\nsaid place while it met with the said accident. He submitted that as\n\nper the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Oriental Insurance\n\ncompany Vs. Sudhakaran K.V.'s case (supra) the position of the said\n\ndeceased Bhim Singh was akin to the pillion rider and, therefore, the\n\ninsurance company could not be held liable. He relied upon para 23\n\nof the said judgment, which is reproduced herewith for ready\n\nreference:-\n\n\n\n                       \"(23).    The law which emerges from the said\n                       decisions, is : (i) the liability of the insurance\n                       company in a case of this nature is not extended to\n                       a pillion rider of the motor vehicle unless the\n                       requisite amount of premium is paid for covering\n                       his\/her risk (ii) the the legal obligation arising\n                       under Section 147 of the Act cannot be extended to\n                       an injury or death of the owner of vehicle or the\n                       pillion rider; (iii) the pillion rider in a two wheeler\n                       was not to be treated as a third party when the\n                       accident has taken place owning to rash and\n                       negligent riding of the scooter and not on the part\n                       of the driver of another vehicle.\"\n\n\n\n9.             Relying on other two judgments, he submitted that the\n\nsaid deceased Bhim Singh cannot be said to have hired the said\n\nvehicle in question and, therefore, could not be taken as owner of the\n\ngoods and his position was that of a gratuitous passenger and in view\n CMA 248\/1989 -Mazid Vs. Smt. Raj Kunwar &amp; Ors.         Judgment dt.28.4.09\n\n\n\n                                         5\/6\n\n\nof the judgments cited by him, the insurance company could not be\n\nheld liable.\n\n\n\n10.            Having heard learned counsels and having gone through\n\nthe record of the case and the impugned judgment of the Tribunal,\n\nthis Court is of the opinion that there is no force in the submissions\n\nmade by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company.               The\n\nTribunal has found as a matter of fact that the deceased along with\n\nanother person Moti Singh, who deposed before the Tribunal as PW 3\n\nthat both these persons had taken the said truck insured by the\n\nInsurance company respondent No.3 for carrying goods on hire on\n\nmonthly basis from the owner of the vehicle the present appellant. At\n\nthe time of accident also, the said persons were returning back from\n\nthe site Bhilwara. They had emptied one lot of goods. In view of\n\nthese findings, which this court does not find any reason to hold them\n\nto be perverse in any manner and the said findings of fact are binding,\n\nit cannot be held that the deceased Bhim Singh was either a gratuitous\n\npassenger in the said goods vehicle or his case may be equated with\n\nthat of a pillion rider, who was held to be not a third party by the\n\nHon'ble Supreme Court in case of Oriental Insurance company Vs.\n\nSudhakaran K.V. (supra). Moreover in view of the premium charged\n\nby the insurance company to the extent of Rs.36\/- for non fare\n\npassengers also as is evident from the copy of the cover note\n\nproduced with the application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC, there is\n CMA 248\/1989 -Mazid Vs. Smt. Raj Kunwar &amp; Ors.               Judgment dt.28.4.09\n\n\n\n                                         6\/6\n\n\nno reason to hold that the said insurance company was not liable to\n\npay the entire compensation determined by the Tribunal in present\n\ncase.\n\n\n\n11.             In view of this, the judgments relied upon by the learned\n\ncounsel for the Insurance Company are of no avail to it and the\n\nTribunal appears to have erred in holding the owner liable to pay the\n\ncompensation to the extent of Rs.50,800\/- in para 19 of the judgment.\n\n\n\n12.       Application under Order 41 Rule 21 is, therefore, liable to be\n\nallowed and the same is allowed.\n\n\n\n13.             Consequently this appeal of the owner is allowed and the\n\nimpugned order is set aside to the extent it holds the owner liable to\n\npay the part of compensation and in view of the aforesaid\n\ncircumstances, the Insurance Company is liable to pay the entire\n\ncompensation as awarded by the Tribunal. No order as to costs.\n\n\n\n                                               [ DR. VINEET KOTHARI ], J.\n<\/pre>\n<p>itemNo.7<br \/>\nbabulal\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Rajasthan High Court &#8211; Jodhpur Mazid vs Smt. Raj Kanwar &amp; Ors on 28 April, 2009 CMA 248\/1989 -Mazid Vs. Smt. Raj Kunwar &amp; Ors. Judgment dt.28.4.09 1\/6 S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.248\/1989 Mazid Vs. Smt. Raj Kunwar &amp; Ors. Date of order : 28th April, 2009 PRESENT HON&#8217;BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr. R.K. [&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":[8,19],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-183636","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-rajasthan-high-court-jodhpur"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Mazid vs Smt. Raj Kanwar &amp; Ors on 28 April, 2009 - 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\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mazid vs Smt. Raj Kanwar &amp; Ors on 28 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-04-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-22T01:16:08+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\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mazid vs Smt. Raj Kanwar &amp; Ors on 28 April, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-22T01:16:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009\"},\"wordCount\":25,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009\",\"name\":\"Mazid vs Smt. Raj Kanwar &amp; Ors on 28 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-22T01:16:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mazid vs Smt. Raj Kanwar &amp; Ors on 28 April, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Mazid vs Smt. Raj Kanwar &amp; Ors on 28 April, 2009 - 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\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mazid vs Smt. Raj Kanwar &amp; Ors on 28 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-04-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-22T01:16:08+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\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mazid vs Smt. Raj Kanwar &amp; Ors on 28 April, 2009","datePublished":"2009-04-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-22T01:16:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009"},"wordCount":25,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009","name":"Mazid vs Smt. Raj Kanwar &amp; Ors on 28 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-04-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-22T01:16:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mazid-vs-smt-raj-kanwar-ors-on-28-april-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mazid vs Smt. Raj Kanwar &amp; Ors on 28 April, 2009"}]},{"@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\/183636","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=183636"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/183636\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=183636"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=183636"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=183636"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}