{"id":184462,"date":"2004-11-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-11-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004"},"modified":"2015-01-19T22:59:58","modified_gmt":"2015-01-19T17:29:58","slug":"daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004","title":{"rendered":"Daulat Ram &amp; Ors vs Sodha &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2004"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Daulat Ram &amp; Ors vs Sodha &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2004<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Bhan<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Ashok Bhan, S.H. Kapadia<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  5032 of 2002\n\nPETITIONER:\nDaulat Ram &amp; Ors.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSodha &amp; Ors. \n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 16\/11\/2004\n\nBENCH:\nASHOK BHAN &amp; S.H. KAPADIA\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n<p>BHAN, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThis appeal, by grant of special leave, is directed against the<br \/>\njudgment and order dated 26.9.2001 of a Single Judge of the High<br \/>\nCourt of Himachal Pradesh in Second Appeal No. 212 of 1995.  The<br \/>\nHigh Court by the impugned judgment has confirmed the judgment<br \/>\nand decree passed by the first Appellate Court and decreed the suit<br \/>\nfiled by the Respondent No. 1.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tFacts giving rise to this appeal, in short, are:\n<\/p>\n<p>\tOne Prati, son of Kamna, executed a Will on 11.01.1977 in favour<br \/>\nof his nephews, appellants herein, bequeathing his entire property in<br \/>\ntheir favour.  In the Will no provision was made by Prati either for his<br \/>\nwife Gulabo or for his daughter Sodha  Respondent No. 1 herein<br \/>\nfrom his another wife Radhi. This Will was duly executed, attested<br \/>\nand registered. Thereafter, on 08.05.1983 Prati executed another Will<br \/>\nwherein he revoked\/cancelled his earlier Will dated 11.01.1977 and<br \/>\nbequeathed his property to his daughter, Respondent No. 1. This Will<br \/>\nwas duly executed and attested but was not registered.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tPrati died on 10.05.1983. After his death Respondent No. 1  filed<br \/>\nSuit No. 102 of 1983 on 14.07.1983 for injunction restraining the<br \/>\nappellants from interfering with her possession over the property of<br \/>\nher deceased father claiming herself to be the owner in possession of<br \/>\nthe said property or in the alternative for possession thereof by virtue<br \/>\nof Will executed in her favour dated 08.05.1983.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tAppellants contested the suit denying that the Respondent No. 1<br \/>\nwas the daughter of Prati.  That the alleged Will propounded by the<br \/>\nRespondent No. 1 was prepared in collusion with the scribe and the<br \/>\nattesting witnesses. According to them Prati had died issueless. They<br \/>\npropounded the Will dated 11.1.1977 executed by Prati wherein the<br \/>\nentire property was bequeathed by him in their favour and claimed<br \/>\nthemselves to be the legal heirs and only successors to the estate of<br \/>\ndeceased Prati.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tTrial Court dismissed the suit filed by the Respondent No. 1.  It<br \/>\nwas held that she was not the daughter of Prati.  That Prati did not<br \/>\nexecute any Will in favour of Respondent No. 1. It was further<br \/>\nobserved that the Will dated 11.01.1977 in favour of appellants was<br \/>\nvalid and by virtue of the same appellants were entitled to the estate<br \/>\nleft by Prati.   Being aggrieved, Respondent No. 1 preferred civil<br \/>\nappeal.  First Appellate Court after reappraising the entire evidence set<br \/>\naside the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court. The suit filed<br \/>\nby the Respondent No. 1 was decreed by observing that Respondent<br \/>\nNo. 1 was the daughter of deceased Prati and a valid Will had been<br \/>\nexecuted in her favour by Prati.   It was held that she had become the<br \/>\nowner and therefore entitled to the possession of the same.  It was<br \/>\nobserved after close scrutiny of both the Wills that the Will dated<br \/>\n11.01.1977 was procured by the appellants under pressure from Prati<br \/>\nwhich was subsequently revoked by him by executing the second Will<br \/>\ndated 08.05.1983.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tAppellants preferred a regular second appeal against the<br \/>\njudgment and decree passed by the first appellate Court which was<br \/>\ndismissed being without any merits.  The judgment and decree passed<br \/>\nby the first Appellate Court was confirmed.  It was observed that the<br \/>\nfirst appellate Court had rightly concluded that Respondent No. 1 was<br \/>\nthe daughter of deceased Prati from his wife Radhi and the Will dated<br \/>\n08.05.1983 was validly executed by him while in sound disposing<br \/>\nmind in the presence of the attesting witnesses and the scribe.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tBeing aggrieved the appellants have preferred this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe only point raised before us is that the second Will dated<br \/>\n08.05.1983 executed by Prati was surrounded by suspicious<br \/>\ncircumstances and the same was forged.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThough appellants in their written statement had averred that<br \/>\nthe Will dated 08.05.1983 was forged but no issue was framed on this<br \/>\npoint.  No evidence was led by the appellants to prove the forgery.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tWill being a document has to be proved by primary evidence<br \/>\nexcept where the Court permits a document to be proved by leading<br \/>\nsecondary evidence.  Since it is required to be attested, as provided in<br \/>\nSection 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, it cannot be used as<br \/>\nevidence until one of the attesting witnesses at least has been called for<br \/>\nthe purpose of proving its execution, if there be an attesting witness<br \/>\nalive, and subject to the process of the Court and capable of giving<br \/>\nevidence.  In addition, it has to satisfy the requirements of Section 63<br \/>\nof the Indian Succession Act, 1925.  In order to assess as to whether the<br \/>\nWill has been validly executed and is a genuine document, the<br \/>\npropounder has to show that the Will was signed by the testator and<br \/>\nthat he had put his signatures to the testament of his own free will;<br \/>\nthat he was at the relevant time in a sound disposing state of mind and<br \/>\nunderstood the nature and effect of the dispositions and that the<br \/>\ntestator had signed it in the presence of two witnesses who attested it<br \/>\nin his presence and in the presence of each other.  Once these elements<br \/>\nare established, the onus which rests on the propounder is discharged.<br \/>\nBut where there are suspicious circumstances, the onus is on the<br \/>\npropounder to remove the suspicion by leading appropriate evidence.<br \/>\nThe burden to prove that the will was forged or that it was obtained<br \/>\nunder undue influence or coercion or by playing a fraud is on the<br \/>\nperson who alleges it to be so.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tRespondent No. 1 has successfully discharged the onus of<br \/>\nproving the due execution of the Will.  The two attesting witnesses,<br \/>\nPW-3 and PW-5, have clearly stated in their depositions that Prati was<br \/>\nin sound disposing mind at the time of the execution of the Will and<br \/>\nhad put his thumb mark on the said Will after the same was read over<br \/>\nto him in their presence and that they had signed the Will in the<br \/>\npresence of the testator and in the presence of each other.  They have<br \/>\ndeposed that Respondent No. 1 was the daughter of Prati and Prati of<br \/>\nhis own volition had executed the Will in favour of Respondent No. 1.<br \/>\nPW-5 is a former Member of Legislative Assembly.  PW-3 is a close<br \/>\nrelation of deceased Prati.  There is nothing on record to indicate that<br \/>\nthey have deposed falsely.  Rather their testimonies inspire confidence.<br \/>\nPW-2 is the scriber of the Will and neighbour of deceased Prati.  He<br \/>\nhas also deposed that Respondent No. 1 is the daughter of Prati and<br \/>\nthat he had scribed the Will at the instance of Prati.  He has also<br \/>\ndeposed that Prati had executed the will of his own while in sound<br \/>\ndisposing state of mind.  The Will propounded by the appellants has<br \/>\nbeen specifically revoked\/cancelled by the Prati in his later Will<br \/>\nstating therein that the earlier Will was got written from him forcibly<br \/>\nby the appellants.  Assertion in the second Will by the testator about<br \/>\nthe earlier Will having been forcibly got executed from him by the<br \/>\nappellants is corroborated by the fact that in the earlier Will it was<br \/>\nshown that the testator had no child or heir except the appellants and<br \/>\nthe fact of presence of Respondent No. 1, daughter of testator, was<br \/>\nsuppressed.  From the reading of the first Will it is clear that<br \/>\nappellants were aware that Prati had a daughter who could at any<br \/>\ntime lay her claim to the property of her father.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe only suspicious circumstance surrounding the Will pointed<br \/>\nout is that Prati had thumb-marked the second Will, whereas the<br \/>\nearlier Will had been signed by him.  According to the appellants this<br \/>\nshows that Prati was physically incapable of executing the Will.<br \/>\nAccording to them, Prati was unconscious for 2  3 days prior to his<br \/>\ndeath which took place a day next to the execution of the Will.<br \/>\nCounsel for the appellants referred to the statement of DW-6,<br \/>\nDevi Ram  a purohit, who has stated that he had gone to the house of<br \/>\nPrati a day or two earlier for pundhan which was done by one of the<br \/>\nappellants as Prati was not in a position to do so being unconscious.<br \/>\nWe do not find much substance in this submission as it has come on<br \/>\nrecord that though Prati was illiterate he had learnt to put his<br \/>\nsignatures, but most of the time he used to put his thumb impression.<br \/>\nHe was 84-85 years of age.  In the face of unequivocal and trustworthy<br \/>\nstatements of scribe PW-2 and the attesting witnesses PW-3 and PW-5,<br \/>\nmuch reliance cannot be placed on the testimony of DW-6.  No other<br \/>\nwitness has been examined to show that Prati was unconscious at the<br \/>\ntime of the execution of the Will.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe burden to prove that the Will dated 8.5.1993 executed by<br \/>\nPrati in favour of his daughter was forged or was obtained by undue<br \/>\ninfluence or by playing a fraud was on the appellants which they have<br \/>\nfailed to discharge.  No evidence was led by them on either of these<br \/>\npoints.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tBe that as it may, the second Will executed by Prati has been<br \/>\nproved to be genuine and validly executed by him wherein he has<br \/>\nbequeathed his entire property to his daughter, Respondent No. 1.<br \/>\nThe earlier Will executed in favour of the appellants has been<br \/>\nspecifically revoked.  Since the earlier Will stands revoked it cannot be<br \/>\ngiven effect to.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tWe agree with the findings recorded by the High Court that<br \/>\nRespondent No. 1 is the daughter of Prati and Prati had executed a<br \/>\nvalid will in her favour.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThere is no merit in this appeal and the same is dismissed with<br \/>\nno order as to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Daulat Ram &amp; Ors vs Sodha &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2004 Author: Bhan Bench: Ashok Bhan, S.H. Kapadia CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 5032 of 2002 PETITIONER: Daulat Ram &amp; Ors. RESPONDENT: Sodha &amp; Ors. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 16\/11\/2004 BENCH: ASHOK BHAN &amp; S.H. KAPADIA JUDGMENT: J U D G M [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-184462","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Daulat Ram &amp; Ors vs Sodha &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2004 - 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\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Daulat Ram &amp; Ors vs Sodha &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004\" \/>\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=\"2004-11-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-01-19T17:29:58+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\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Daulat Ram &amp; Ors vs Sodha &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2004\",\"datePublished\":\"2004-11-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-01-19T17:29:58+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004\"},\"wordCount\":1615,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004\",\"name\":\"Daulat Ram &amp; Ors vs Sodha &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2004-11-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-01-19T17:29:58+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Daulat Ram &amp; Ors vs Sodha &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2004\"}]},{\"@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":"Daulat Ram &amp; Ors vs Sodha &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2004 - 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\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Daulat Ram &amp; Ors vs Sodha &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2004-11-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-01-19T17:29:58+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\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Daulat Ram &amp; Ors vs Sodha &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2004","datePublished":"2004-11-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-01-19T17:29:58+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004"},"wordCount":1615,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004","name":"Daulat Ram &amp; Ors vs Sodha &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2004-11-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-01-19T17:29:58+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/daulat-ram-ors-vs-sodha-ors-on-16-november-2004#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Daulat Ram &amp; Ors vs Sodha &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2004"}]},{"@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\/184462","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=184462"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/184462\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=184462"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=184462"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=184462"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}