{"id":190376,"date":"1956-11-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1956-11-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956"},"modified":"2018-08-24T04:09:08","modified_gmt":"2018-08-23T22:39:08","slug":"ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956","title":{"rendered":"Ramakrishna Pillai And Ors. vs Varadarajaswami Koil, &#8230; on 29 November, 1956"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Ramakrishna Pillai And Ors. vs Varadarajaswami Koil, &#8230; on 29 November, 1956<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: AIR 1957 Mad 735<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Ramaswami<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Ramaswami<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<pre><\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>  Ramaswami, J.  <\/p>\n<pre> 1. This appeal is   directed    against\nthe judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Kumbakonam in O. S. No. 68 of 1951.  \n \n\n 2. In Elandurai village there are 60 velis of\nland  of   which  45    velis   are inam     sarvamanyam\nlands.     The rest are tharapu lands.    In   regard  to\nthe   mirasdars   of these   sarvamanyam     lands   there are   certain properties   commonly  owned by   there\nand which are utilised for remunerating the village\nartisans and also for such purpose as  are obligations on the part of these inam sarvamanyam mirasdars   like  channel-digging,  the  performance of  village utsavams etc.     The  properties set   apart    in\ncommon  seem to be considerable.     It may be stat\ned at the outset itself and what has been pointed\nout by the learned counsel for the respondent that\nthe defendants  own    considerable  shares  in   these\ninam   servamanyam  lands   in comparison   to  whom\nthe shares owned by the plaintiffs are inconsidera\nble.  \n \n\n 3. In these circumstances, in  1937 the sarvamanyam  mirasdars have  met and  they have    put the three defendants in management of these common properties.  \n \n\n 4.  But apparently  this  arrangement  has     not been successful to the  extent of satisfying all  the mirasdars and as usual there seems to be a faction with the result that this suit has been filed for framing    a scheme and secondly for making the defendants account to  the   plaintiffs in    regard to the management of these common samudayam properties.  \n \n\n<\/pre>\n<p> 5. On coming to court the plaintiffs were met with the contention on the part of the defendants namely that first of all the suit as framed is not maintainable because when the samudayam properties are owned by these mirasdars as co-owners and it is neither a public trust nor a private trust, no question of framing a scheme arises and the only remedy of the dissatisfied mirasdars is to ask for a partition and rendition of accounts or settle the matter out of court by the mirasdars assembling and defendants by a set of new managers in whom they have trust.\n<\/p>\n<p> 6. The defendants however made it clear<br \/>\nthrough the first defendant that they are not averse<br \/>\nto accounting as all, that as a matter of fact they<br \/>\nrealise their responsibilities and they have been<br \/>\nperforming their duties properly and they do not<br \/>\nwish to escape any liability under the head of ac<br \/>\ncounting.\n<\/p>\n<p> 7. The learned Subordinate Judge came to<br \/>\nthe conclusion that on the frame of the suit a<br \/>\nscheme cannot be framed and it followed that this<br \/>\nsuit cannot be converted into a suit for accounting<br \/>\nand a decree passed on that foot. Therefore he<br \/>\ndismissed the suit.\n<\/p>\n<p> 8. The defeated plaintiffs appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p> 9. In appeal I am of the same opinion as the<br \/>\nlearned Subordinate Judge under both heads.\n<\/p>\n<p> 10. This is not a case of    either a public or private trust in regard to which schemes   can   be framed.    It has been held by this Court in Narayanaswami Naidu v. Balasundaram Naidu,  (A), followed in Chellam Pillai v. Chatham Pillai, AIR 1953 Trav C 198 (B) that even in the case of private trusts, schemes can be framed.   BUT in the context of this case that decision has no application. This is a case of co-ownership  of  samudayam   properties in  which   each  of these sarvamanyam mirasdars has a share and what is his is that of the other man also.    It is a case of being mine and thine. Therefore in such a case we cannot merely juggle with words and say that these managers were put in that    position by the other mirasdars to look after the properties as their delegates or  trustees and from the expression &#8216;trustees&#8217; spell out a trust and then spell out from a trust the foundation  for framing a scheme.    Therefore  the learned Subordinate Judge rightly pointed out, following the decisions in Yegnarama Dikshitar v. Gopala Pattar, 1917 Mad WN 595: (AIR 1918 Mad 733) (C), Midnapore Zamindary Company Ltd. v. Naresh Narayan Roy ILR 51 Cal 631: (AIR  1924 PC 144) (D), Khiaram s\/o Hariram v. Tahilram, AIR  1947 Sind 134 (E) and   Bhagavan Sahai v. Mukundalal, AIR 1949 All 562 (F) that the proper remedy open to these plaintiffs was to file a suit for partition and rendition of accounts by the persons managing the properties.    I agree with him that barring this remedy the only other remedy open to these plaintiffs  which has also been indicated by him is by replacing by consent, by majority or otherwise, the present set of managers or delegates by new set of managers and  for which apparently they seem  to have slender  hopes of doing   so.    Therefore  point No. I has got to be decided in favour of the defendants as has been done by the learned Subordinate Judge of Kumbakonam.\n<\/p>\n<p> 11. Turning to the second point, the fact that the Ist defendant endorsed that he considers himself accountable would not enable us to convert this into a suit of a different nature and give a decree for accounting. The learned Subordinate Judge has pertinently pointed out that if there is no private trust, then there is no question of applying Section 10 of the Limitation Act invoked in paragraph 17 of the plaint and the proper article that may be applicable in a case of partition and rendition of accounts would be Article 120 and even assuming that by the endorsement on the back of the plaint on 14-8-1952 the 1st defendant had undertaken to render accounts to all the co-owners like the plaintiffs for the plaint period, the question would be whether any accounting could be ordered in this suit as framed and which is not one for partition. The plaint in paragraph 21 (b) prays for a decree for accounting against the defendants surcharging them and for any surplus being handed over to the new trustees to be appointed In this suit. Therefore the learned Subordinate Judge has rightly pointed out that this prayer is so closely and inextricably blended with the prayer in paragraph 21(c) of the plaint wherein a scheme for management is asked for, that it would not be proper to cut and chop and convert the suit of one nature into a suit of different nature and grant a relief not on sound and well established principles but simply in the hope that some justice might be done and the village affairs might be run smoothly. As once again pointed out by the learned Subordinate Judge, if the suit for the framing of a scheme for management of private properties at the instance of co-sharers, whose remedy is a suit for partition, is not maintainable, it would follow that no trustees could be appointed in this suit, for the appointment of any trustee even at the risk of repetition would mean that the properties would vest in the trustees, and co-sharers or co-owners would cease to have any rights of ownership, which is not the basis in the plaint, which does claim common ownership in the suit properties. Therefore there cannot be &#8220;accounting&#8221; as prayed for in paragraph 21(b) of the plaint, where the surplus is asked to be given to the trustees to be appointed in this suit. The only advantage of the endorsement of the first defendant is that it would act as a personal estoppel against him and it would not be open to him to deny the liability of the managers for their stewardship during the period in question.\n<\/p>\n<p> 12. The conclusions of the learned Subordinate Judge being correct, they are affirmed and this appeal is dismissed with costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Ramakrishna Pillai And Ors. vs Varadarajaswami Koil, &#8230; on 29 November, 1956 Equivalent citations: AIR 1957 Mad 735 Author: Ramaswami Bench: Ramaswami JUDGMENT Ramaswami, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Kumbakonam in O. S. No. 68 of 1951. 2. In Elandurai [&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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-190376","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Ramakrishna Pillai And Ors. vs Varadarajaswami Koil, ... on 29 November, 1956 - 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\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ramakrishna Pillai And Ors. vs Varadarajaswami Koil, ... on 29 November, 1956 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956\" \/>\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=\"1956-11-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-23T22:39:08+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ramakrishna Pillai And Ors. vs Varadarajaswami Koil, &#8230; on 29 November, 1956\",\"datePublished\":\"1956-11-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-23T22:39:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956\"},\"wordCount\":1039,\"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\\\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956\",\"name\":\"Ramakrishna Pillai And Ors. vs Varadarajaswami Koil, ... on 29 November, 1956 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1956-11-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-23T22:39:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ramakrishna Pillai And Ors. vs Varadarajaswami Koil, &#8230; on 29 November, 1956\"}]},{\"@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":"Ramakrishna Pillai And Ors. vs Varadarajaswami Koil, ... on 29 November, 1956 - 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\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ramakrishna Pillai And Ors. vs Varadarajaswami Koil, ... on 29 November, 1956 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1956-11-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-23T22:39:08+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ramakrishna Pillai And Ors. vs Varadarajaswami Koil, &#8230; on 29 November, 1956","datePublished":"1956-11-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-23T22:39:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956"},"wordCount":1039,"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\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956","name":"Ramakrishna Pillai And Ors. vs Varadarajaswami Koil, ... on 29 November, 1956 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1956-11-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-23T22:39:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramakrishna-pillai-and-ors-vs-varadarajaswami-koil-on-29-november-1956#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ramakrishna Pillai And Ors. vs Varadarajaswami Koil, &#8230; on 29 November, 1956"}]},{"@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\/190376","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=190376"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/190376\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=190376"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=190376"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=190376"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}