{"id":199164,"date":"2001-12-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2001-12-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001"},"modified":"2016-04-10T09:40:36","modified_gmt":"2016-04-10T04:10:36","slug":"suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001","title":{"rendered":"Suresh Chandra Poddar vs Dhani Ram And Ors on 6 December, 2001"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Suresh Chandra Poddar vs Dhani Ram And Ors on 6 December, 2001<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: K.T, Thomas, S.N. Phukan<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  535 of 2001\n\nPETITIONER:\nSURESH CHANDRA PODDAR\n\nRESPONDENT:\nDHANI RAM AND ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 06\/12\/2001\n\nBENCH:\nK.T, THOMAS &amp; S.N. PHUKAN\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>2001 Supp(5) SCR 498<\/p>\n<p>The following Order of the Court was delivered :\n<\/p>\n<p>This is an instance of how a Tribunal vested with the powers to punish for<br \/>\nContempt of Court became over sensitive in using such powers. Time and<br \/>\nagain this Court has cautioned as to when and in what circumstances<br \/>\nContempt of Court jurisdiction is to be exercised. Such a power is not<br \/>\nintended to be exercised as a matter of course. Courts should not feel<br \/>\nunduly touchy when they are told that the orders have not been implemented<br \/>\nforthwith. If the court is told that the direction or the order of the<br \/>\nCourt has been complied with subsequently, albeit after receipt of notice<br \/>\nof contempt, we except the courts to show judicial grace and magnanimity in<br \/>\ndealing with the action for con-tempt.\n<\/p>\n<p>The Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi, has<br \/>\nHow convicted the Director of Education, Government of NCT of Delhi under<br \/>\nSection 17 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 read with Section 12<br \/>\nof the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and sentenced him to a fine of Rs, 2000<br \/>\nas per the impugned order. The Bench held that the appellant is guilty of<br \/>\ncontempt, not because he did not implement the order passed by the Tribunal<br \/>\nbut because there was delay in implementing the order.\n<\/p>\n<p>The order of the Tribunal which is said to have been belatedly complied<br \/>\nwith was passed on 3rd November, 1999, the operative portion of which reads<br \/>\nthus :\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;For the foregoing reasons, the present O.A. succeeds. The seniority list<br \/>\npublished by respondents I to 3 on 21st November, 1995 in so far as the<br \/>\nsame shows respondents 4 and 5 senior to applicants is set aside.<br \/>\nRespondents 1 to 3 are now directed to publish a fresh seniority list in<br \/>\nthe light of the observations contained in the present judgment and grant<br \/>\nthe applicants their due seniority over that of respondents 4 and 5 and<br \/>\ngrant them further consequent! reliefs they may be entitled to under rules.<br \/>\nThere shall, however, in the facts and circumstances of this case be no<br \/>\norder as to costs.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>What is discernible from the said operative portion is that the Tribunal<br \/>\ndid not fix up a time limit within which the said direction has to be<br \/>\ncomplied with. The contempt action was taken against the appellant on 24th<br \/>\nAugust, 2000. Appellant submitted in the reply before the Tribunal that the<br \/>\norder of the Tribunal was being challenged before the High Court of Delhi<br \/>\nunder Article 226 of the Constitution of India and a Division Bench of the<br \/>\nHigh Court had admitted the writ petition and issued nonce to the opposite<br \/>\nparties on 24th October, 2000. Despite the pendency of the said writ<br \/>\npetition, appellant in-formed the Tribunal that the direction of the<br \/>\nTribunal was complied with on 27th October, 2000 itself.\n<\/p>\n<p>There is no dispute that the appellant has complied with the order of the<br \/>\nTribunal on 27th October, 2000. There is no dispute that appellants had<br \/>\nchal-lenged the said order before the High Court, Ever since the order of<br \/>\nthe Tribunal was passed, speedy steps have been taken by the Department.<br \/>\nCon-sultations were in progress between the Department and the Secretary<br \/>\n(Law and Judicial) and on their instructions the letter was addressed to<br \/>\nthe Government&#8217;s counsel and on his advise, further steps were taken and<br \/>\nultimately the Depart-ment moved the High Court under Article 226 of the<br \/>\nConstitution of India. All these things have been stated by the appellant<br \/>\nin full details before the Tribunal. In spite of all those submissions and<br \/>\nin spite of the Tribunal being told that even during the pendency of the<br \/>\nwrit petition before the High Court, they imple-mented the order so as to<br \/>\navert any possible action against them for contempt, the Tribunal has<br \/>\nchosen to convict the appellant and sentenced him to a fine of Rs, 2000.\n<\/p>\n<p>We may also point out that the appellant, when called upon by the Tribunal<br \/>\nto appear in person, tendered an apology even after showing all the steps<br \/>\ntaken for challenging the order of the Tribunal dated 3rd November. 1999.<br \/>\nthe Tribunal simply turned down the apology of the appellant for the<br \/>\nfollowing reasonings :<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The Tribunal&#8217;s orders are definitely subject to scrutiny of the High Court<br \/>\nunder Article 226 of the Constitution, But the orders of the Tribunal are<br \/>\npassed for compliance and not to be thrown aside to gather dust. They have<br \/>\nto be respected with all expedition. Question the order, if you take a<br \/>\ndecision to do so promptly and should be filed at the latest within three<br \/>\nmonths and if one does not succeed there, one has to abide by the order and<br \/>\ncomply with the same, at the latest by six months. Any delay thereafter<br \/>\nwould have to be treated as wilful violation. If the orders are not<br \/>\nrespected it would destroy the confidence of the people in the courts and<br \/>\nif such an object was achieved it would be a great public disaster.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>The Tribunal quoted the following observation of this Court in Principal<br \/>\nRajni Parekh Arts, K .<a href=\"\/doc\/1933495\/\">B. Commerce and B.C.J. Science College, Khambhat and<br \/>\nAnr. v. Mahendra Ambalal Shah,<\/a> [1986] 2 SGC 560 .:-\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;If any court is to accept an apology of a contemner tendered at a late<br \/>\nstage, it would encourage litigants to flout the orders of courts with<br \/>\nimpunity&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>The background in which the said observation was made had been overlooked<br \/>\nand applied it in a different situtation<\/p>\n<p>Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 197 1 has indicated a caution<br \/>\nthat while dealing with the powers of contempt, the court should be<br \/>\ngenerous in discharging the contemner if he tenders an apology to the<br \/>\nsatisfaction of the Court; In the present case the apology tendered was<br \/>\nfound to be not genuine by the Tribunal. We are dismayed, if not<br \/>\ndistressed, that despite delineating on all the steps adopted by the<br \/>\nappellant for challenging the order of the Tribunal before the High Court<br \/>\nand despite the fact that the appellant had implemented the order even<br \/>\nthough there was no time schedule to do so, the Tribunal has chosen to<br \/>\ndepict the apology tendered by the appellant as one without contri-tion.\n<\/p>\n<p>Section 13 of the Contempt of Courts Act says that notwithstanding anything<br \/>\ncontained in any law for the time being in force, no court shall impose a<br \/>\nsentence &#8220;unless it is satisfied that the contempt is of such a nature that<br \/>\nit substantially interferes, or tends substantially to interfere with the<br \/>\ndue course of justice&#8221; (emphasis supplied).\n<\/p>\n<p>Even if appellant had not implemented the order and if the appellant had<br \/>\nbrought to the notice of the Tribunal that the order of the Tribunal is<br \/>\nunder challenge before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution<br \/>\nof India (the course which has been judicially recognised by a seven Judge<br \/>\nBench of this Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/1524908\/\">L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India and Ors.,<\/a> [1997]<br \/>\n3 SCC 261 the Tribunal should have been slow to proceed against the party<br \/>\nin a contempt action. Of course it can be said that no stay was granted by<br \/>\nthe Court when the appellant moved the Division Bench of the High Court<br \/>\nunder Article 226 of the Constitution. Not granting the stay by itself is<br \/>\nnot enough to speed up proceedings against a person in contempt because the<br \/>\nvery order is yet to become final. At any rate the Tribunal should have<br \/>\ndirected the appellant to implement the direction, in the absence of the<br \/>\nstay order from the High Court, within a time frame fixed by it. We would<br \/>\nhave appreciated if the Tribunal had done so and then considered whether<br \/>\naction should be taken in the event of the non implementation of the order<br \/>\nafter die expiry of the said time frame.\n<\/p>\n<p>We have chosen to say so much in this case to give a message to the<br \/>\nTribunal that contempt jurisdiction is not to be exercised casually but<br \/>\nonly sparingly and in very deserving cases. It is appropriate to bear in<br \/>\nmind the adage &#8220;It is good to have the power of giant, but not good to use<br \/>\nit always.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>For the aforesaid reasons we set aside the impugned order of the Tribunal<br \/>\nand exonerate the appellant totally from the actions for contempt of court.<br \/>\nThe fine, if any remitted, shall be refunded to him.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Suresh Chandra Poddar vs Dhani Ram And Ors on 6 December, 2001 Bench: K.T, Thomas, S.N. Phukan CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 535 of 2001 PETITIONER: SURESH CHANDRA PODDAR RESPONDENT: DHANI RAM AND ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 06\/12\/2001 BENCH: K.T, THOMAS &amp; S.N. PHUKAN JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT 2001 Supp(5) SCR 498 The following [&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-199164","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Suresh Chandra Poddar vs Dhani Ram And Ors on 6 December, 2001 - 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\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Suresh Chandra Poddar vs Dhani Ram And Ors on 6 December, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001\" \/>\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=\"2001-12-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-04-10T04:10:36+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\\\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Suresh Chandra Poddar vs Dhani Ram And Ors on 6 December, 2001\",\"datePublished\":\"2001-12-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-10T04:10:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001\"},\"wordCount\":1402,\"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\\\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001\",\"name\":\"Suresh Chandra Poddar vs Dhani Ram And Ors on 6 December, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2001-12-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-10T04:10:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Suresh Chandra Poddar vs Dhani Ram And Ors on 6 December, 2001\"}]},{\"@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":"Suresh Chandra Poddar vs Dhani Ram And Ors on 6 December, 2001 - 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\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Suresh Chandra Poddar vs Dhani Ram And Ors on 6 December, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2001-12-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-04-10T04:10:36+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\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Suresh Chandra Poddar vs Dhani Ram And Ors on 6 December, 2001","datePublished":"2001-12-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-10T04:10:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001"},"wordCount":1402,"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\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001","name":"Suresh Chandra Poddar vs Dhani Ram And Ors on 6 December, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2001-12-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-10T04:10:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-chandra-poddar-vs-dhani-ram-and-ors-on-6-december-2001#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Suresh Chandra Poddar vs Dhani Ram And Ors on 6 December, 2001"}]},{"@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\/199164","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=199164"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/199164\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=199164"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=199164"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=199164"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}