{"id":199158,"date":"2008-09-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008"},"modified":"2018-04-10T13:51:34","modified_gmt":"2018-04-10T08:21:34","slug":"sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"Sabbirbhai vs Indrajitsinh on 23 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Sabbirbhai vs Indrajitsinh on 23 September, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Akil Kureshi<\/div>\n<pre>  \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n \n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/810720\/2008\t 6\/ 8\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 8107 of 2008\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE AKIL\nKURESHI\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nTo\n\t\t\t\tbe referred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil  judge ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\nSABBIRBHAI\nABDULHUSSEN MODY &amp; 1 - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nINDRAJITSINH\nBHAGWATSINH RATHOD &amp; 3 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\nAppearance : \nMR\nMEHUL S SHAH for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2.MR SURESH\nM SHAH for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2. \nMR NIKHIL S KARIEL for\nRespondent(s) : 1 -\n4. \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 23\/09\/2008  \n \nORAL JUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>1.\tRULE.\n<\/p>\n<p>Learned advocate Mr Nikhil Kariel for the respondents waives service<br \/>\nof Rule.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tPetitioners<br \/>\nare the original plaintiffs.  They have instituted Special Civil Suit<br \/>\nNo. 69 of 2007 before the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bhuj.<br \/>\n Issue pertains to dispute between the parties with respect to<br \/>\ncertain immovable properties which we may refer to as the  suit<br \/>\nproperty . The petitioners plaintiffs had agreed to purchase the<br \/>\nsaid suit property from the respondents original defendants.<br \/>\nApparently, before the Civil Court, the defendants contended that<br \/>\nthey always were and are ready and willing to perform their part of<br \/>\nthe contract, and if the<br \/>\nplaintiffs&#8217; act according to the terms of the agreement, defendants<br \/>\nhave no hesitation in transferring the suit land in favour of the<br \/>\nplaintiffs.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tIt<br \/>\nappears that between the plaintiffs and the defendants, disputes<br \/>\narose with respect to procedure for executing the sale deed.  As per<br \/>\nthe defendants, the plaintiffs had not been prepared to make full<br \/>\npayment of the purchase price of the suit land and were, therefore,<br \/>\nraising frivolous objections. Be that as it may, it appears that the<br \/>\ndefendants filed applications Exhs.136 and 137 before the Trial<br \/>\nCourt.  In the application Exh.136 filed on 16.05.2008, the<br \/>\ndefendants contended that the plaintiffs have not acted as per the<br \/>\nCourt&#8217;s order, therefore, the defendants be permitted to reclaim the<br \/>\noriginal documents pertaining to the suit land.  In application<br \/>\nExh.137; also filed on 16.05.2008, the defendants stated that since<br \/>\nthe plaintiffs had not acted as per the direction of the Court, the<br \/>\noriginal agreement to sale stands cancelled and the original<br \/>\ndocuments be returned  to the defendants.  It is not in dispute that<br \/>\nthe learned Judge passed the impugned order dated 16.05.2008 commonly<br \/>\ndisposing of the applications Exhs.136 and 137 and held that the<br \/>\nplaintiffs are not ready and willing to perform their part of the<br \/>\nagreement and they, therefore, are not entitled to order of specific<br \/>\nperformance and the agreement to sale, therefore, stands cancelled.<br \/>\nHe, therefore, found that the original documents pertaining to the<br \/>\nsuit land be returned to the defendants.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tOn<br \/>\n10.06.2008, the learned Single Judge of this Court had passed the<br \/>\nfollowing order:-\n<\/p>\n<p> Mr.Nikhil<br \/>\nKariel appears on behalf of the caveator. Mr.Shah for the petitioner<br \/>\nsubmitted that the applications Exh.136 and 137 were tendered on 16th<br \/>\nMay, 2008 and the orders thereon came to be passed on the same day<br \/>\ni.e. on 16th May, 2008 but without hearing the present<br \/>\npetitioners.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.Kariel<br \/>\nhas opposed the submission that the orders were passed without<br \/>\nhearing the present petitioners. In his submission, the petitioners&#8217;<br \/>\nrepresentative, though present  in the Court at earlier point of<br \/>\ntime, did not remain present at the time the application was taken up<br \/>\nfor hearing and the order was passed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Be that<br \/>\nas it may, the facts remain that the applications were tendered on<br \/>\n16th May, 2008 and the order came to be passed on the same<br \/>\nday. The petitioners herein could have been given an opportunity to<br \/>\nfile their objections and of being heard before passing the said<br \/>\norder.\n<\/p>\n<p>However,<br \/>\nunfortunately, the order seems to have been already acted upon<br \/>\ninasmuch as the trial Court appears to have returned the documents<br \/>\npursuant to the order dated 16th May, 2008. Not only this<br \/>\nbut subsequently the respondent, as per the submissions made by<br \/>\nMr.Kariel today, has already parted with part of the suit land on 6th<br \/>\nJune, 2008 i.e. about 22 acres out of total 97 acres of suit land.\n<\/p>\n<p>In view<br \/>\nof the facts and circumstances which now obtain on record of the<br \/>\npresent petition and particularly after the order dated 16th<br \/>\nMay, 2008, the records and proceedings of the Special Civil Suit<br \/>\nNo.66\/2008 and particularly the record relating to Exhibits 131, 132,<br \/>\n136, 137, 139 and 140 be called for so as to reach this Court on or<br \/>\nbefore 25th June, 2008.\n<\/p>\n<p>Notice<br \/>\nreturnable on 25th June, 2008. Mr.Kariel waives notice on<br \/>\nbehalf of the respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\nrespondents will not further alienate, in any manner i.e. by way of<br \/>\nsale or otherwise, the balance suit land until 25th June,<br \/>\n2008.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tBasic<br \/>\nfacts are not in dispute.  It is not in dispute that applications<br \/>\nExhs.136 and 137 were filed by the defendants on 16.05.2008.  It is<br \/>\nalso not in dispute that copies thereof were not served on the<br \/>\nplaintiffs.  It is also not in dispute that both these applications<br \/>\ncame to be granted by the learned Judge by the impugned common order<br \/>\ndated 16.05.2008.  Thus, admittedly and quite surprisingly,<br \/>\napplications Exhs. 136 and 137 came to be filed on 16.05.2008, came<br \/>\nto be entertained on the same day, came to be granted also on the<br \/>\nsame day, without even copies thereof being served on the plaintiffs.<br \/>\nNo special reasons are forthcoming in the impugned order why the<br \/>\napplications should have been considered with such undue urgency.  If<br \/>\nthe defendants were justified in contending before the Court that the<br \/>\nplaintiffs by their conduct  had demonstrated that they are not ready<br \/>\nand willing to perform their part of the contract and had thereby<br \/>\nrendered themselves ineligible to seek specific performance of the<br \/>\ncontract, it was always open for the learned Judge to come to such a<br \/>\nconclusion after giving proper opportunity to both the sides.  Such<br \/>\nconclusions could not have been arrived at unilaterally without any<br \/>\nopportunity to the plaintiffs and in any case, in such hot haste.<br \/>\nEffectively by the said order dated 16.05.2008, the learned Judge<br \/>\nrendered the suit of the plaintiffs infructuous.  The learned Judge<br \/>\nconcluded against the plaintiffs that they are not willing to perform<br \/>\ntheir part of contract.  The learned Judge, therefore, held that the<br \/>\nplaintiffs are not entitled to seek specific performance of the<br \/>\ncontract.  Whatever be the conduct of the plaintiffs, they were<br \/>\nentitled to fair hearing before such conclusions could be drawn<br \/>\nagainst them.  From the order, it appears that the learned Judge<br \/>\nwaited through the day for the advocate of the plaintiffs or the<br \/>\nplaintiffs themselves.  Without any prior intimation or service of<br \/>\ncopies of the applications, it is difficult to understand how the<br \/>\nlearned Judge expected the plaintiffs or their advocate to appear and<br \/>\noppose the applications.  In any case, what baffles me the most is<br \/>\nthat there was virtually no reason for the learned Judge to proceed<br \/>\non those applications peremptorily without even waiting for a day&#8217;s<br \/>\ntime being granted to the plaintiffs and in fact without even copies<br \/>\nof such applications being served on the plaintiffs.  The entire<br \/>\nprocedure adopted lacks transparency.  It is unfortunate that such<br \/>\nconclusions of far reaching effect were arrived at without giving any<br \/>\nopportunity whatsoever to the plaintiffs to oppose the prayers made<br \/>\nin the applications.  Curiously in the applications Exhs. 136 and<br \/>\n137, it was not even the prayers of the defendants that the Court<br \/>\nshould hold that the plaintiffs are not entitled to seek specific<br \/>\nperformance of the contract.  The learned Judge travelled beyond the<br \/>\nprayers made in the applications Exhs. 136 and 137 and granted<br \/>\nprayers which were not even made therein.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tIn<br \/>\nview of the above discussion, submission of the counsel for the<br \/>\nrespondents that on account of their conduct, the petitioners are not<br \/>\nentitled to any relief in the present proceedings cannot be accepted.<br \/>\nIf by their conduct, the plaintiffs had shown their unwillingness to<br \/>\nperform their side of the contract, the learned Judge could have<br \/>\npassed appropriate orders after hearing the plaintiffs but not<br \/>\nbefore.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tUnder<br \/>\nthe circumstances, I have no hesitation in striking down the impugned<br \/>\norder dated 16.05.2008.  The same is, therefore, set aside.  As<br \/>\nrecorded by the learned Single Judge of this Court in the order dated<br \/>\n10.06.2008,<br \/>\nit is the case of the respondents herein   original defendants that<br \/>\nin the meantime, they have entered into certain further transaction.<br \/>\nIt would be open for the petitioners to take redressal in this regard<br \/>\nin accordance with law.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tIn the<br \/>\nresult, the petition is allowed with cost of Rs.10,000\/- (Rupees ten<br \/>\nthousand only).\n<\/p>\n<p>\tRule is<br \/>\nmade absolute accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tWrit of<br \/>\nthis order shall be sent promptly.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(Akil<br \/>\nKureshi, J.)<\/p>\n<p>mrpandya*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Sabbirbhai vs Indrajitsinh on 23 September, 2008 Bench: Akil Kureshi SCA\/810720\/2008 6\/ 8 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8107 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-199158","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Sabbirbhai vs Indrajitsinh on 23 September, 2008 - 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\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sabbirbhai vs Indrajitsinh on 23 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-09-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-04-10T08:21:34+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\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sabbirbhai vs Indrajitsinh on 23 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-10T08:21:34+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1327,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008\",\"name\":\"Sabbirbhai vs Indrajitsinh on 23 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-10T08:21:34+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sabbirbhai vs Indrajitsinh on 23 September, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Sabbirbhai vs Indrajitsinh on 23 September, 2008 - 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\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sabbirbhai vs Indrajitsinh on 23 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-04-10T08:21:34+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\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sabbirbhai vs Indrajitsinh on 23 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-10T08:21:34+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008"},"wordCount":1327,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008","name":"Sabbirbhai vs Indrajitsinh on 23 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-10T08:21:34+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabbirbhai-vs-indrajitsinh-on-23-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sabbirbhai vs Indrajitsinh on 23 September, 2008"}]},{"@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\/199158","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=199158"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/199158\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=199158"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=199158"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=199158"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}