{"id":202828,"date":"2008-10-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-10-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008"},"modified":"2017-09-20T21:19:22","modified_gmt":"2017-09-20T15:49:22","slug":"kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008","title":{"rendered":"Kidara vs Rajwanti on 16 October, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Kidara vs Rajwanti on 16 October, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>Regular Second Appeal No. 21 of 2006                                   1\n\n\n\n\n      In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh.\n\n\n                Regular Second Appeal No. 21 of 2006\n\n                     Date of Decision: 16.10.2008\n\n\nKidara\n                                                              ...Appellant\n                                 Versus\nRajwanti\n                                                           ...Respondent\n\nCORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.\n\nPresent: Mr. Arvind Singh, Advocate\n         for the appellant.\n\nKanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.\n<\/pre>\n<p>           This regular second appeal was preferred by Kidra son of<\/p>\n<p>Risala. He has been unsuccessful in the two Courts below.<\/p>\n<p>           Case of the appellant is that he was in possession of 1\/3rd<\/p>\n<p>share of the suit land, particulars of which have been given in the plaint.<\/p>\n<p>By filing a suit he wanted that judgment and decree passed in Civil Suit<\/p>\n<p>No. 37 of 10.1.1996 passed on 17.2.1986 be set aside. It has been<\/p>\n<p>further stated that the mutation sanctioned on the basis of decree be<\/p>\n<p>also set aside as the same had been obtained by way of fraud. It was<\/p>\n<p>further stated in the suit that in the year 1986, respondent had brought<\/p>\n<p>appellant-plaintiff to Rohtak for medical check up, as he was required to<\/p>\n<p>thumb mark some papers as guarantor to the tractor loan case. It has<\/p>\n<p>been further stated that he came to know in December 1985 that the<\/p>\n<p>defendant had misused those papers and on misrepresentation a<\/p>\n<p>decree had been passed against the plaintiff. It was further pleaded that<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> Regular Second Appeal No. 21 of 2006                                    2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>he being an illiterate and old person could not comprehend outcome of<\/p>\n<p>the litigation. He prayed that the decree and subsequent mutation be<\/p>\n<p>set aside being illegal, null and void.\n<\/p>\n<p>          Notice of the suit was issued. The Defendant appeared. She<\/p>\n<p>took a preliminary objection that the suit is not maintainable and the<\/p>\n<p>same is time barred. It was further stated that by his own act and<\/p>\n<p>conduct, the plaintiff is estopped from filing the present suit and no<\/p>\n<p>cause of action has arisen and he has no locus standi. On merits, it was<\/p>\n<p>stated that the judgment and decree dated 17.6.1986 was passed in<\/p>\n<p>favour of the defendant in accordance with law regarding 1\/3rd share of<\/p>\n<p>the land measuring 500 kanals 9 marlas and not 50 kanals 9 marlas. It<\/p>\n<p>was further stated that the appellant-plaintiff himself suffered a decree in<\/p>\n<p>favour of the defendant. He had engaged a counsel, filed a written<\/p>\n<p>statement in which averments made in the plaint were admitted and<\/p>\n<p>made a statement in the Court according to his own free will and<\/p>\n<p>consent without any coercion.\n<\/p>\n<p>          After the pleadings of the parties had concluded, following<\/p>\n<p>issues have been framed by learned trial Court:-<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>          1.         Whether the Civil Court decree dated 17.2.1986 is<\/p>\n<p>                     illegal, null and void? OPP<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>          2.         Whether the plaintiff is owner in possession of the<\/p>\n<p>                     suit property? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>          3.         Whether the suit is not maintainable in the present<\/p>\n<p>                     form?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>          4.         Whether the suit is barred by limitation? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>          5.         Whether the plaintiff is estopped from filing the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> Regular Second Appeal No. 21 of 2006                                 3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>                     present suit by his own act and conduct? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>            6.       Relief.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>            The appellant-plaintiff led evidence and examined one<\/p>\n<p>Devender Kumar, Clerk, DRK, Rohtak, as PW.1. Plaintiff himself<\/p>\n<p>appeared as PW.1 and also examined Satbir son of Diwan and another<\/p>\n<p>Satbir son of Ram Chander as PW.3 and PW.4, respectively.<\/p>\n<p>Thereafter, the evidence was closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>            The defendant herself examined as DW.1. One Ram Kishan<\/p>\n<p>was examined as DW.2 and documents Ex.D1 to Ex.D12 were<\/p>\n<p>tendered.\n<\/p>\n<p>            The two Courts below have taken into consideration the fact<\/p>\n<p>that the defendant is none else but the grand daughter in relation to the<\/p>\n<p>appellant. It further returned a finding that since the appellant had<\/p>\n<p>himself appeared in the Court and had deposed, therefore, his plea that<\/p>\n<p>the the earlier decree was result of fraud cannot be upheld. The two<\/p>\n<p>Courts below further came to conclusion that consent decree is as good<\/p>\n<p>as a decree obtained after contest. The plea that inadvertently decree<\/p>\n<p>instead of 1\/6th share was passed regarding 1\/3rd share was also<\/p>\n<p>declined. The two Courts below have also came to conclusion that since<\/p>\n<p>the decree had been passed on 17.2.1986 in the earlier suit, the present<\/p>\n<p>suit was filed on 24.1.1997. Thus, there was a delay of more than 12<\/p>\n<p>years. The two Courts below have returned a concurrent finding of fact<\/p>\n<p>that there was no fraud and the plea raised subsequently is after<\/p>\n<p>thought.\n<\/p>\n<p>            Mr. Arvind Singh, Advocate, appearing for the appellant has<\/p>\n<p>stated that in view of fiduciary relationship, fraud is writ large. I am<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\"> Regular Second Appeal No. 21 of 2006                                  4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>unable to accept this contention as I cannot re-appraise and           re-<\/p>\n<p>appreciate the evidence led before learned trial Court. Reliance has<\/p>\n<p>been placed upon <a href=\"\/doc\/1914087\/\">Chalti Devi and Others v. Rajinder Kumar and<\/p>\n<p>Another<\/a> 2003(3) Punjab Law Reporter 463 to contend that a person<\/p>\n<p>who was in dominant relationship, onus is caused upon that person to<\/p>\n<p>prove that there was no fraud. Reliance has been also placed upon<\/p>\n<p>another judgment Madan Lal and Another v. Rajesh Kumar (Dead)<\/p>\n<p>through LRs. 2005(3) Punjab Law Reporter 466.\n<\/p>\n<p>          The two Courts below after taking into consideration the<\/p>\n<p>evidence of appellant-plaintiff and his two witnesses namely Satbir son<\/p>\n<p>of Diwan PW.3 and Satbir son of Ram Chander PW.4 held that in this<\/p>\n<p>case, the plea of fraud cannot be accepted.\n<\/p>\n<p>          No material has been placed before me to differ with the well<\/p>\n<p>reasoned finding returned by the two Courts below. Learned counsel for<\/p>\n<p>the appellant has urged that substantial question of law is that whether a<\/p>\n<p>decree was obtained by way of fraud or not?. In the facts and<\/p>\n<p>circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that there was a fraud on<\/p>\n<p>the part of defendant-respondent, therefore, on facts, question raised<\/p>\n<p>being substantial cannot be entertained.\n<\/p>\n<p>          Thus, the appellant cannot succeed and his Regular Second<\/p>\n<p>Appeal cannot be accepted.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>                                           (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia)<br \/>\n                                                                Judge<br \/>\nOctober 16, 2008<br \/>\n&#8220;DK&#8221;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Punjab-Haryana High Court Kidara vs Rajwanti on 16 October, 2008 Regular Second Appeal No. 21 of 2006 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Regular Second Appeal No. 21 of 2006 Date of Decision: 16.10.2008 Kidara &#8230;Appellant Versus Rajwanti &#8230;Respondent CORAM: HON&#8217;BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. Arvind Singh, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-202828","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Kidara vs Rajwanti on 16 October, 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\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kidara vs Rajwanti on 16 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-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=\"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-20T15:49:22+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kidara vs Rajwanti on 16 October, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-20T15:49:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008\"},\"wordCount\":908,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008\",\"name\":\"Kidara vs Rajwanti on 16 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-20T15:49:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kidara vs Rajwanti on 16 October, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"Kidara vs Rajwanti on 16 October, 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\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kidara vs Rajwanti on 16 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-20T15:49:22+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kidara vs Rajwanti on 16 October, 2008","datePublished":"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-20T15:49:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008"},"wordCount":908,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008","name":"Kidara vs Rajwanti on 16 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-20T15:49:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kidara-vs-rajwanti-on-16-october-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kidara vs Rajwanti on 16 October, 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:\/\/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\/202828","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=202828"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/202828\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=202828"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=202828"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=202828"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}