{"id":199053,"date":"2009-12-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-12-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009"},"modified":"2018-07-17T01:46:12","modified_gmt":"2018-07-16T20:16:12","slug":"the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009","title":{"rendered":"The Secretary vs Thomas Jose on 15 December, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
The Secretary vs Thomas Jose on 15 December, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nLA.App..No. 89 of 2001(B)\n\n\n\n1. THE SECRETARY, MUNICIPALITY, THODUPUZHA\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. THOMAS JOSE\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP\n\n                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN\n\n Dated :15\/12\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n    PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.\n      --------------------------------------------------------\n    LAA. No. 89 of 2001 & Cross Objection No. 9 of 2008\n   ------------------------------------------------------------\n          Dated this the 15th day of December, 2009\n\n                        J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
Pius C. Kuriakose, J.\n<\/p>\n
     This appeal is preferred by the requisitioning authority<\/p>\n
Thodupuzha Municipality and the memorandum of cross<\/p>\n
objection is filed by claimant Nos. 1 and 3 who are<\/p>\n
respondent Nos. 1 and 3 in the appeal.             The properties<\/p>\n
under acquisition were situated in Thodupuzha Village and<\/p>\n
the purpose of the acquisition was construction of Municipal<\/p>\n
Bus Stand Shopping Complex. The relevant Section 4(1)<\/p>\n
notification was published on 20-9-1981.                 The land<\/p>\n
acquisition officer categorised the lands under acquisition<\/p>\n
into four categories. Included in category-A were properties<\/p>\n
having frontage of the State Highway and lying at a level<\/p>\n
with the State Highway. For these properties he awarded<\/p>\n
LAA. 89\/01\n<\/p>\n
                              – 2 –\n<\/p>\n
\nland value at the rate of Rs.5211\/- per cent. Included in<\/p>\n
category-B were properties lying by the side of the State<\/p>\n
Highway at a higher level than the State Highway.         For<\/p>\n
these properties, he awarded land value at the rate of<\/p>\n
Rs.4777\/- per cent. Included in category -C were properties<\/p>\n
lying by the side of Kothaikunnu Road. For these properties,<\/p>\n
he awarded land value at the rate of Rs.4560\/- per cent.<\/p>\n
Included in category – D were properties without frontage of<\/p>\n
road and for these properties, he awarded land value at the<\/p>\n
rate of Rs.4342\/- per cent. The reference court on the basis<\/p>\n
of the evidence adduced by the parties particularly, Ext.A8<\/p>\n
judgment in an earlier acquisition in the same village for the<\/p>\n
purpose of construction of bus stand re-fixed the value of<\/p>\n
the properties under acquisition. For properties which were<\/p>\n
included by the LAO in category – A the value was re-fixed<\/p>\n
at 80% over what was awarded by the LAO. Similarly, for<\/p>\n
properties in category B, C and D the values were re-fixed<\/p>\n
LAA. 89\/01\n<\/p>\n
                              – 3 –\n<\/p>\n
\nat 65%, 67% and 50% respectively over what was awarded<\/p>\n
by the LA Officer. In the appeal preferred by the requisition<\/p>\n
authority it is contended that the enhancement is excessive.<\/p>\n
The memorandum of cross objection is for enhancement in<\/p>\n
value of structures and also claim for further enhancement<\/p>\n
in land value.\n<\/p>\n
     2.    We      have    heard    the   submissions      of<\/p>\n
Mr.K.Gopalakrishna Kurup, learned counsel for the appellant<\/p>\n
Municipality and those of Sri. K.K.Chandran Pillai, Sri.Shaji<\/p>\n
P. Chaly, Sri.K.S.Babu, Advocates appearing for the various<\/p>\n
claimants, especially Smt. N. Sudha, learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
cross objectors. While Mr.Gopalakrishna Kurup argued that<\/p>\n
the reasoning adopted by the learned Sub Judge is not<\/p>\n
sound and that the enhancement granted in land value is<\/p>\n
excessive,    Smt.Sudha submitted that the enhancement<\/p>\n
granted is inadequate. She submitted in particular, that the<\/p>\n
court below was in error in not awarding any enhancement<\/p>\n
LAA. 89\/01\n<\/p>\n
                              – 4 –\n<\/p>\n
\ntowards the value of the structures which existed on the<\/p>\n
property belonging to them consisting of three buildings and<\/p>\n
a cow shed for which the LA Officer awarded a total amount<\/p>\n
of Rs.47,399\/-. According to her, even adopting the<\/p>\n
principle that valuation of buildings as per PWD schedule of<\/p>\n
rates is not a pragmatic proposition there was justification<\/p>\n
for granting enhancement of at least 30% over what was<\/p>\n
awarded.\n<\/p>\n
     3. We have considered the rival submissions. We have<\/p>\n
carefully gone through the impugned judgment.            The<\/p>\n
learned counsel for the Municipality is right when he submits<\/p>\n
that the reasoning of the learned Subordinate Judge for<\/p>\n
fixing the market value is not very sound. But we in this<\/p>\n
appeal are called upon to decide whether the rates<\/p>\n
ultimately fixed by the learned Sub Judge can be said to be<\/p>\n
excessive. After all, Ext.A8 was in respect of lands in same<\/p>\n
village and the acquisition under Ext.A8 was also for a<\/p>\n
LAA. 89\/01\n<\/p>\n
                              – 5 –\n<\/p>\n
\nstatutory corporation. We notice the judgment of this court<\/p>\n
in State of Kerala v. Jose Simon,<\/a> 2009(1) KLT 760 which<\/p>\n
pertains to acquisition of land in Thodupuzha Village though<\/p>\n
pursuant to a notification of some 19 years subsequent to.<\/p>\n
We notice various other judgments of this court pertaining<\/p>\n
to acquisition of land within the area of Thodupuzha<\/p>\n
Municipality. Taking into account those judgments and the<\/p>\n
evidence which is actually available on record in this case<\/p>\n
we are of the view that the rates fixed under the impugned<\/p>\n
judgment by the learned Subordinate Judge as value of the<\/p>\n
lands in the various categories under acquisition is more or<\/p>\n
less equal to the market value of the properties at relevant<\/p>\n
time.    We don’t find any reason for interfering with the<\/p>\n
fixation of market value under the impugned judgment. As<\/p>\n
for the grievance of the cross objectors, in view of our<\/p>\n
finding that the value fixed under the impugned judgment is<\/p>\n
more or less equal to the market value of the land at the<\/p>\n
LAA. 89\/01\n<\/p>\n
                              – 6 –\n<\/p>\n
\nrelevant time, we don’t find any justification for granting<\/p>\n
further increase in the value. At the same time, we notice<\/p>\n
some genuineness in the grievance of the cross objectors<\/p>\n
that   the  court   below    should  have    awarded     some<\/p>\n
enhancement towards value of structures taking into<\/p>\n
account the reality that construction of buildings in<\/p>\n
conformity with the PWD schedule of rate is not a pragmatic<\/p>\n
proposition. Taking that aspect of the matter into account,<\/p>\n
we are of the view that the cross objectors should be<\/p>\n
awarded atleast Rs.10,000\/- more towards additional<\/p>\n
compensation for the buildings which existed on their<\/p>\n
property.\n<\/p>\n
      4. The result of the above discussion is that the appeal<\/p>\n
will stand dismissed and the cross objections will stand<\/p>\n
allowed to the extent of awarding further amount of<\/p>\n
Rs.10,000\/- to the cross objectors over and above what is<\/p>\n
awarded by the court below. It is made clear that since the<\/p>\n
LAA. 89\/01\n<\/p>\n
                               – 7 –\n<\/p>\n
\naward of the L.A. Officer is passed subsequent to 30-4-<\/p>\n
1982, the claimants will be entitled for all statutory benefits<\/p>\n
admissible under Sections 23(2), 23(1A) and 28 of the Land<\/p>\n
Acquisition Act. It is clarified that the solatium component<\/p>\n
of the compensation will also carry interest under Section<\/p>\n
28. The parties are directed to suffer their respective costs.<\/p>\n
                         PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE<\/p>\n
                         K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE
\nksv\/-\n<\/p>\n
LAA. 89\/01\n<\/p>\n
              – 8 –\n<\/p>\n
                 PIUS C. KURIAKOSE &
\n                 K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.\n<\/p>\n
                   LAA. NO. 89 0f 2001<\/p>\n
                     JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
                   15th December, 2009<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court The Secretary vs Thomas Jose on 15 December, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM LA.App..No. 89 of 2001(B) 1. THE SECRETARY, MUNICIPALITY, THODUPUZHA … Petitioner Vs 1. THOMAS JOSE … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER The Hon’ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE The Hon’ble MR. Justice […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-199053","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Secretary vs Thomas Jose on 15 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Secretary vs Thomas Jose on 15 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-12-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-07-16T20:16:12+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\\\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Secretary vs Thomas Jose on 15 December, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-16T20:16:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1027,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009\",\"name\":\"The Secretary vs Thomas Jose on 15 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-16T20:16:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Secretary vs Thomas Jose on 15 December, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"The Secretary vs Thomas Jose on 15 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Secretary vs Thomas Jose on 15 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-12-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-07-16T20:16:12+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\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Secretary vs Thomas Jose on 15 December, 2009","datePublished":"2009-12-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-16T20:16:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009"},"wordCount":1027,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009","name":"The Secretary vs Thomas Jose on 15 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-12-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-16T20:16:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-secretary-vs-thomas-jose-on-15-december-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Secretary vs Thomas Jose on 15 December, 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:\/\/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\/199053","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=199053"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/199053\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=199053"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=199053"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=199053"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}