{"id":201289,"date":"2011-03-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-03-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011"},"modified":"2018-03-30T00:30:41","modified_gmt":"2018-03-29T19:00:41","slug":"sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011","title":{"rendered":"Sabiha vs Abdullatif on 3 March, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Sabiha vs Abdullatif on 3 March, 2011<\/div>\n
Author: Ks Jhaveri,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \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\/543\/2011\t 6\/ 6\tORDER \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. 543 of 2011\n \n\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nSABIHA\nVALI MAHMED PATEL THRO' POA VALI MAHMAD PATEL & 1 - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nABDULLATIF\nHUSENVALI JIRU'S THRO'POA ISMAIL YUSUF SOJRA & 11 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nMM SAIYED for\nPetitioner(s) : 1 - 2. \nNone for Respondent(s) : 1 -\n12. \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 KS JHAVERI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 24\/01\/2011 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n
1.\tThe
\npresent petition is filed against the order dated 02.11.2010 passed
\nby the 6th Additional Senior Judge, Bharuch upon Exhibit
\nNos. 22, 24, 28 & 30 in Regular Civil Suit No. 229 of 2009.\n<\/p>\n
2.\tIt
\nis the case of the petitioners that partition took place between
\nlegal heirs of Ahmed Musa and Vali Musa and on account of partition
\nten properties vide Account No. 39 were mutated in the name of legal
\nheirs of Ahmed Musa while nine properties vide account no. 40 were
\nmutated in the name of Vali Musa.  The original plaintiffs-respondent
\nnos. 1 to 4 are grand children of Vali Musa.  In the year 2001, Civil
\nSuit No. 164\/2001 was filed against the respondent nos. 2 to 4 and
\nlater on respondent no. 1 also became a party to the suit wherein
\ndetails of partition of the year 1999 were mentioned.\n<\/p>\n
2.1\tOn
\n20.04.2006, the petitioner no. 1 purchased a parcel of land
\nadmeasuring 60 Are bearing survey no. 37\/1 of village Kantharia vide
\nregistered sale deed dated 01.09.2005 executed by one Mr. Margha in
\nthe capacity of Power of Attorney holder of land owners. Thereafter,
\nthe petitioner no. 1 sold suit land to Mr. Ibrahim Adam Patel and on
\nhis death the name of  petitioner no. 2 came to be mutated in the
\nrevenue records in the capacity of owner and occupier of said land.
\nIn the year 2009 the respondent nos. 1 to 4 filed Suit No. 229\/2009
\nagainst the petitioners and respondent nos. 5 to 13 and prayed for
\ndeclaration that sale deeds of suit properties are not binding to
\nthem and other co-owners etc.  <\/p>\n
2.2\tThe
\npetitioners preferred applications under Order 14 Rule 2 of the Civil
\nProcedure Code below Exihibits making a prayer to frame primary
\nissues of limitation as the suit no. 229\/2009 was as per them time
\nbarred.  The trial court vide the impugned order rejected the same.
\nHence the present petition is preferred.\n<\/p>\n
3.\tHeard
\nMr. Mihir Thakore, learned Senior Counsel appearing with Mr. Saiyed
\nfor the petitioners.  Mr. Thakore has submitted that the trial court
\nought to have considered the fact that the entire suit can be decided
\non the basis of primary issue of limitation.  He has relied upon a
\ndecision of this court rendered in First Appeal No. 81 of 2010 on
\n23.03.2010, more particularly, paras 11 & 19 which read as under:\n<\/p>\n
“11.\t\tWhile
\narguing the question of limitation, learned counsel for the
\nappellants has raised question that the appellants have got in their
\nfavour a registered document executed by defendant Nos. 1 and 4 on
\n17.5.1995 and part consideration of Rs. 2,55,000\/- was paid. Further
\nthe possession of the land was conveyed to the brother of the
\nplaintiffs with their consent on 2.3.1998 and therefore they have a
\nright to maintain the Suit and the Suit is within limitation because
\nthe agreement in their favour was cancelled in the year 2003 and they
\nwere in possession pursuant to the agreement and handed over
\npossession in pursuance of that agreement possession was handed over
\nto their brother.\n<\/p>\n
…\n<\/p>\n
19.\t\tThe
\nnext question which comes before us is that  Sale Deeds in favour of
\ndefendant Nos. 6 and 7 were executed  on 11.9.1997 and were
\nregistered. The registration itself is a deemed notice of refusal of
\nperformance by the original owners – defendant Nos. 1 to 4 to
\nthe plaintiffs. Not only this, their own admission in their evidence
\nthat the Suit was filed by defendant No. 9 being Civil Suit No. 93 of
\n1999 was at the behest of the plaintiffs. Thus, this is more than a
\nnotice to the defendants.  They admit that in 1999 when they got the
\nSuit filed, they had known of the sale in favour of defendant Nos. 6
\nand 7. It cannot, there,  be said that they had no notice of the
\nimpugned Sale Deeds which are sought to be cancelled in the year
\n1999.  In that background the Suit would be barred by limitation.  A
\nreference in this regard may be made to the following observations of
\nthe Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of  PANCHANAN DHARA VS.
\nMONMATHA NATH MAITY reported in (2006) 5 SCC 340 at paragraph No. 20:\n<\/p>\n
“Contention
\nof Mr. Mishra as regards the applicability of the first or the second
\n part of Article 54 of the Limitation Act will have to be judged
\nhaving regard to the aforementioned findings of fact. A plea of
\nlimitation is a mixed question of law and fact. The question as to
\nwhether a suit for specific performance of contract will be barred by
\nlimitation or not would not only depend upon the nature of the
\nagreement but also on the conduct of the parties and also as to how
\nthey understood the terms and conditions of the agreement. It is not
\nin dispute that the suit for specific performance of contract would
\nbe governed by Article 54 of the Limitation Act, 1963. While
\ndetermining the applicability of the first or the second part of the
\nsaid provision, the Court will firstly see as to whether any time was
\nfixed for performance of the agreement of sale and if it was so
\nfixed, whether the suit was filed beyond the prescribed period unless
\nany case of extension of time for performance was pleaded and
\nestablished. When, however, no time is fixed for performance of
\ncontract, the Court may determine the date on which the plaintiff had
\nnotice of refusal on the part of the defendant to perform the
\ncontract and in that event the suit is required to be filed within a
\nperiod of three years therefrom.”\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\tA
\nreference may also be made to the following observations of the
\nHon’ble Supreme Court in the case of PREM SINGH VS. BIRBAL reported
\nin (2006) 5 SCC 353  at para 20:\n<\/p>\n
“If
\nthe plaintiff is in possession of a property, he may file a suit for
\ndeclaration that the deed is not binding upon him but if he is not in
\npossession thereof, even under a void transaction, the right
\nby way of adverse possession may be claimed. Thus, it is not correct
\nto contend that the provisions of the Limitation Act would have no
\napplication at all in the event the transaction is held to be void.”\n<\/p>\n
4.\tAs
\na result of hearing and perusal of records, this court is of the
\nopinion that the trial court has gone into the evidence in detail and
\nhas come to the conclusion that the issue of limitation in facts of
\nthe present case cannot be decided without evidence being recorded
\nand therefore tried as a preliminary issue.  The trial court in paras
\n6.2 & 6.3 has in detail dealt with the issue of limitation and
\nobserved that in Regular Civil Suit No. 139\/1987, the original
\nplaintiff no .1 was shown as defendant no. 12 whereas the rest of the
\nplaintiffs were not made a party.  There is no clarification from the
\nrecords whether the defendant no. 12 who is shown to be resident of
\nBolston, U.K was ever served with the summons of the above suit or
\nwas the service to him dispensed with.  From the plaint of Regular
\nCivil Suit No. 164\/2001 it is apparent that at the time of
\ninstitution only the original plaintiffs nos. 2 to 4 were joined as
\ndefendant nos. 4 to 6 and the original plaintiff no. 1 was later
\njoined as defendant no. 7 upon his application.  In that view of the
\nmatter, this court is of the opinion that the trial court was just
\nand proper in concluding that the evidence was required to be led and
\nthe issue of limitation cannot be decided as a preliminary issue.\n<\/p>\n
4.1\tAs
\nfar as the decision of this court in First Appeal No. 81\/2010 is
\nconcerned, this court is of the view that the same shall not be
\napplicable to the facts of the present case inasmuch as the prayer
\nno. 2 prayed for in the suit no. 229\/2008 is qua the year 2008 and it
\nshall be for the court to decide at the time of trial instead of
\ndeciding the same as a preliminary issue.\n<\/p>\n
5.\tIn
\nthe premises aforesaid, the present petition is devoid of any merits
\nand is accordingly dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
(K.S.\n<\/p>\n
JHAVERI, J.)<\/p>\n
Divya\/\/<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Sabiha vs Abdullatif on 3 March, 2011 Author: Ks Jhaveri,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/543\/2011 6\/ 6 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 543 of 2011 ========================================================= SABIHA VALI MAHMED PATEL THRO’ POA VALI MAHMAD PATEL & 1 – Petitioner(s) Versus ABDULLATIF […]<\/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-201289","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSabiha vs Abdullatif on 3 March, 2011 - 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\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sabiha vs Abdullatif on 3 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-03-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-03-29T19:00:41+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\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sabiha vs Abdullatif on 3 March, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-03-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-29T19:00:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1314,\"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\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011\",\"name\":\"Sabiha vs Abdullatif on 3 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-03-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-29T19:00:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sabiha vs Abdullatif on 3 March, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"Sabiha vs Abdullatif on 3 March, 2011 - 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\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sabiha vs Abdullatif on 3 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-03-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-03-29T19:00:41+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\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sabiha vs Abdullatif on 3 March, 2011","datePublished":"2011-03-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-29T19:00:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011"},"wordCount":1314,"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\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011","name":"Sabiha vs Abdullatif on 3 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-03-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-29T19:00:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sabiha-vs-abdullatif-on-3-march-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sabiha vs Abdullatif on 3 March, 2011"}]},{"@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\/201289","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=201289"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/201289\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=201289"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=201289"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=201289"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}