{"id":204955,"date":"1999-08-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1999-08-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999"},"modified":"2016-09-06T20:45:21","modified_gmt":"2016-09-06T15:15:21","slug":"mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999","title":{"rendered":"Mahender Kumar vs Lata Chauhan &amp; Anr. on 18 August, 1999"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Delhi High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Mahender Kumar vs Lata Chauhan &amp; Anr. on 18 August, 1999<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: V Jain<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: V Jain<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<pre><\/pre>\n<p>ORDER<\/p>\n<p>Vijender Jain, J.<\/p>\n<p>1.<br \/>\n     The  Eviction petition was filed against the respondent under  Section 14(1)(e)  of the Delhi Rent Control Act (in short &#8216;DRC Act&#8217;) on  13.3.1995.The summons were issued. However, it seems that summons were refused to  be accepted  by the respondent but the Additional Rent Control  again  ordered  service by publication. The publication was effected in &#8216;Jansatta&#8217; but  the<br \/>\nAdditional  Rent Controller was not satisfied as instead of publishing  the summons  under  Schedule  III, ordinary summons were  published  and  again Additional  Rent Controller ordered that the respondent be  served  through affixation  at  the  given address. In view of the report  of  the  process server,  who went to the address of the respondent on 1.6.1995,  10.6.1995, 20.6.1995 and ultimately on 10.7.1995 when respondent refused on accept the summons,  a  copy of the summons was pasted at the given  address  and  the process  server  also obtained signature of one Narain Pujari of  the  Shiv<br \/>\nMandir,  the  Additional Rent Controller passed the order  of  eviction  on 12.7.1995 as no application to contest was filed by the respondent within a period of 15 days. However, Additional Rent Controller granted six  months&#8217;time to the respondent to vacate the premises.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.   The  petitioner before me waited for the entire period of  six  months and  filed an execution on 12.2.1996, although no notice of  execution  was required to be served as the same was filed within one year of the  passing of  the eviction order, yet, notice was given. Same story was  repeated  on 15.3.1996, when the process server visited the premises of the espondent,<br \/>\nthe premises was found locked and the copy of the summons was pasted on the door.  A photograph of the same has strangely been filed by the  respondent in  Court. The possession of the premises was taken through the process  of the  court  by the petitioner on 25.4.1996. The executing court  had  fixed 2.5.1996  date for compliance report on which date the respondent filed  an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short &#8216;CPC&#8217;) for setting aside the ex parte decree passed against her.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.   Mr. Vats, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, has  contended that nowhere in the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC or in  the reply  filed  to the present petition, the respondent has disclosed  as  to when  she came to know about the decree having been passed against her.  He has further contended that no application for condensation of delay has been filed by the respondent in support of his application under Order 9 Rule 13 of  the CPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that  in  the absence  of any application for condensation of delay and in the absence  of any specific date from which the respondent came to know about the  passing of  the eviction order, the respondent has deliberately chosen not to  mention  the date in view of Section 3 of the Limitation Act as non-filing  of the application for condensation of delay would have been fatal for the case of  the respondent. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for  the petitioner  has  cited the cases of Pundlik Vithoba Vs. Ganpat &amp;  Anr.  AIR 1934  Nagpur 43, Daulat Singh Vs. Khem Raj AIR (38) 1951 Ajmer 31 and  Mangaldoi  Tea Co.Ltd. Vs. Md.Abdul Latif Munshi AIR 1977 Gauhati 51.  On  the basis  of the aforesaid authorities, Mr.Vats has contended that  the  order passed  by the executing court allowing the application of  the  respondent under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC was without jurisdiction.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.   On  the  other hand, counsel for the respondent has admitted  that  no application was filed for condensation of delay and nowhere it was mentioned in the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC by the respondent  that from  which date the respondent came to know about the passing of  the  decree. The explanation given by the counesl for the respondent was that  the respondent had gone out to Balaji and when she came back on 26.4.1996,  she was  told that possession of the premises in terms of the order  passed  in execution  application had been obtained by the petitioner  and  thereafter he  has filed the application on 2.5.1996 and this fact finds  mention  in the  application  for stay, which was filed by the  respondent  before  the executing  court on 2.5.1996. That application was filed by the  respondent along with application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.   I  have given my careful consideration to the submissions made by  the learned counsel appearing for both the parties. There cannot be any quarrel with the proposition of law that in an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC, the application must mention the date of knowledge of the  passing of a decree against her\/him. It is also correct that if there is a delay of more than 30 days in terms of Schedule 123 of the Limitation Act in  filing the  application for setting aside the ex parte order, an  application  for condensation of delay has to be filed. However, I assume that the respondent<br \/>\nbeing in hurry did not file an application for condensation of delay on  the ground  that  she came to know about the passing of the eviction  order  on 26\/27.4.1996  as has been alleged by the respondent in the application  for stay of dispossession filed before the executing court but that is not  the basis  on  which  the executing court has allowed the  application  of  the respondent. The Additional Rent Controller while disposing of the  application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC reversed the finding of his Predecessor,  who had given as many as three opportunities to the respondent to  be<br \/>\nserved by different modes. Reliance placed by the Additional Rent  Controller  on a previously instituted eviction petition in which  respondent  had appeared and that of another criminal case for the purpose of deciding this application, was not proper and, therefore, the Additional Rent  Controller fell  in error on that account. The learned Additional Rent Controller  had not  taken  into consideration the order passed by  his  Predecessor  dated 12.7.1995  which, inter alia, in detail has discussed in para-2  about  the service affected on the respondent. Lightly, brushing aside the said  finding  without any cogent material by the Additional Rent Controller  in  his order dated 14.5.1996 is without any basis, thus, I hold that the  impugned order dated 14.5.1996 passed by the Additional Rent Controller allowing the application  of the respondent filed under Order 9 Rule 13 of the  CPC  and setting  aside the ex parte order passed by the Additional Rent  Controller dated 12.7.1995 is bad in law and the same is set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.   Petition is allowed. Parties are left to bear their own costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Delhi High Court Mahender Kumar vs Lata Chauhan &amp; Anr. on 18 August, 1999 Author: V Jain Bench: V Jain ORDER Vijender Jain, J. 1. The Eviction petition was filed against the respondent under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act (in short &#8216;DRC Act&#8217;) on 13.3.1995.The summons were issued. However, it seems that [&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":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-204955","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Mahender Kumar vs Lata Chauhan &amp; Anr. on 18 August, 1999 - 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\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mahender Kumar vs Lata Chauhan &amp; Anr. on 18 August, 1999 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999\" \/>\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=\"1999-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-09-06T15:15:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mahender Kumar vs Lata Chauhan &amp; Anr. on 18 August, 1999\",\"datePublished\":\"1999-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-06T15:15:21+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999\"},\"wordCount\":1110,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999\",\"name\":\"Mahender Kumar vs Lata Chauhan &amp; Anr. on 18 August, 1999 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1999-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-06T15:15:21+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mahender Kumar vs Lata Chauhan &amp; Anr. on 18 August, 1999\"}]},{\"@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":"Mahender Kumar vs Lata Chauhan &amp; Anr. on 18 August, 1999 - 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\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mahender Kumar vs Lata Chauhan &amp; Anr. on 18 August, 1999 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1999-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-09-06T15:15:21+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mahender Kumar vs Lata Chauhan &amp; Anr. on 18 August, 1999","datePublished":"1999-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-06T15:15:21+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999"},"wordCount":1110,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999","name":"Mahender Kumar vs Lata Chauhan &amp; Anr. on 18 August, 1999 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1999-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-06T15:15:21+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahender-kumar-vs-lata-chauhan-anr-on-18-august-1999#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mahender Kumar vs Lata Chauhan &amp; Anr. on 18 August, 1999"}]},{"@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\/204955","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=204955"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/204955\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=204955"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=204955"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=204955"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}