{"id":208146,"date":"2009-11-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009"},"modified":"2018-05-29T05:05:21","modified_gmt":"2018-05-28T23:35:21","slug":"shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009","title":{"rendered":"Shiva vs The Fertilizer & Chemicals … on 9 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Shiva vs The Fertilizer & Chemicals … on 9 November, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 31870 of 2009(O)\n\n\n1. SHIVA, S\/O.GOVIND NAIK, D.NO.E-44-1,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE FERTILIZER & CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. CHIEF DISTRIBUTION MANAGER,\n\n3. NAVADURGA WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,\n\n4. SUJAYANAND, S\/O.SHIVA NAIK, OCC: NIL,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER (SR.)\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN\n\n Dated :09\/11\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                    S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.\n               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                      W.P.(C) No. 31870 of 2009\n                - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                      Dated: 9th November, 2009\n\n                                JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
      The Writ Petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:<\/p>\n
1. To call for the records relating to Ext.P7 order and set aside the<\/p>\n
same and allow Ext.P5 application as prayed for.\n<\/p>\n
2. To hold that the order Ext.P2 setting aside the ex parte decree<\/p>\n
enures to the petitioner’s benefit as well under the 1st proviso to<\/p>\n
Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure.\n<\/p>\n
3. To pass an order of stay of all proceedings in the suit O.S.No.215<\/p>\n
of 2000 on the file of the Subordinate Judge’s Court of North Paravur,<\/p>\n
pending disposal of the above writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
      2. Petitioner is the second defendant in O.S.No.215 of 2000 on<\/p>\n
the file of the Sub Court, North Paravur. The above suit is one for<\/p>\n
recovery of money, and the respondents 1 and 2 are the plaintiffs.<\/p>\n
Respondents 3 and 4 in the present petition are defendants 1 and 3<\/p>\n
in the suit. An ex parte decree was passed in the suit on 31.3.2004.<\/p>\n
Defendants 1 and 3 (respondents 3 and 4) moved an application to<\/p>\n
set aside the ex parte decree under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of<\/p>\n
Civil Procedure. That application was allowed by P2 order setting<\/p>\n
W.P.C.No.31870\/09                   – 2 –<\/span><\/p>\n
aside the ex parte decree and restoring the suit to file. After the suit<\/p>\n
was restored, petitioner, the 2nd defendant, moved P5 application<\/p>\n
along with his written statement requesting that the setting aside of<\/p>\n
the ex parte decree be treated as applicable to all the defendants in<\/p>\n
the suit, and he also be permitted to contest the suit and have a<\/p>\n
decision on merits. Plaintiffs filed P6 objections to that application.<\/p>\n
The learned Sub Judge, after hearing both sides, declined the request<\/p>\n
of the petitioner\/2nd defendant by P7 order. Propriety and correctness<\/p>\n
of P7 order is challenged in the Writ Petition invoking the supervisory<\/p>\n
jurisdiction vested with this court under Article 227 of the<\/p>\n
Constitution of India.\n<\/p>\n
      3. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Having regard<\/p>\n
to the submissions made and the facts and circumstances presented<\/p>\n
with reference to P7 order challenged in the writ petition, I find no<\/p>\n
notice to the respondents is necessary and it is dispensed with.<\/p>\n
Learned counsel for the petitioner inviting my attention to P1, copy of<\/p>\n
the plaint in the suit, submitted that the allegations raised by the<\/p>\n
plaintiffs clearly spell out that a decree in common as against all the<\/p>\n
defendants imputing that they are jointly and severally liable for the<\/p>\n
suit claim has been canvassed, and so much so, when the ex parte<\/p>\n
W.P.C.No.31870\/09                   – 3 –<\/span><\/p>\n
decree passed in the suit had been set aside at the instance of some<\/p>\n
of the defendants in the suit, it has to enure to the benefit of all the<\/p>\n
defendants in common. Though it has not been so specifically stated<\/p>\n
in the order setting aside the ex parte decree, having regard to the<\/p>\n
applicability of the first proviso to Rule 13 of Order 9 of the Code of<\/p>\n
Civil Procedure, according to the learned counsel, it is open to the<\/p>\n
court to permit the petitioner\/2nd defendant also to contest the suit,<\/p>\n
receiving his written statement, treating that the decree had been set<\/p>\n
aside ex parte as against him as well in allowing of the application<\/p>\n
moved by the two other defendants in the suit.\n<\/p>\n
      4. The applicability of the first proviso to Rule 13 of Order 9 of<\/p>\n
the C.P.C. canvassed by the learned counsel to contend that the ex<\/p>\n
parte decree set aside at the instance of some other defendants in<\/p>\n
the suit has to be treated as in common for the other defendants as<\/p>\n
well in view of the allegations raised in the plaint imputing joint and<\/p>\n
several liability against the defendants does not at all carry<\/p>\n
conviction. When an ex parte decree is passed against several<\/p>\n
defendants, the ordinary rule is that, if at all, it is set aside, it is<\/p>\n
applicable only in the case of those who had applied for setting it<\/p>\n
aside. However, the first proviso to Rule 13 of Order 9 of the C.P.C.<\/p>\n
W.P.C.No.31870\/09                  – 4 –<\/span><\/p>\n
enables the court to set it aside even as against the others who had<\/p>\n
not appeared, if the nature of the decree requires it. The first proviso<\/p>\n
to the above rule reads thus:\n<\/p>\n
             “Provided that where the decree is of such a nature<\/p>\n
       that it cannot be set aside as against such defendant only<\/p>\n
       it may be set aside as against all or any of the other<\/p>\n
       defendants also.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
It has to be noted the proviso does not confer any right on the party<\/p>\n
but only empower the court while setting aside an ex parte decree at<\/p>\n
the instance of one of the defendants to set aside that decree against<\/p>\n
all or any of the other defendants also where it is satisfied the decree<\/p>\n
is of such a nature that it cannot be set aside solely against the<\/p>\n
defendant who alone had applied for setting aside the ex parte<\/p>\n
decree. The rule would apply in cases where the decree is one and<\/p>\n
indivisible, the decree   likely to be passed after setting aside the<\/p>\n
earlier ex parte decree would result in inconsistent decree, if it were<\/p>\n
not set aside against the other defendants also, the relief to which<\/p>\n
the applicant is entitled to in the suit could not effectively be given<\/p>\n
otherwise than by setting aside the decree as against the other<\/p>\n
defendants also and where the decree proceeds on a ground common<\/p>\n
W.P.C.No.31870\/09                   – 5 –<\/span><\/p>\n
to all the defendants. The fundamental principle to be followed in the<\/p>\n
applicability of the first proviso to Rule 13 of Order 9 C.P.C. is that if<\/p>\n
the ex parte decree is of such a nature that it cannot be set aside<\/p>\n
against the defendant who had applied only, it may be set aside as<\/p>\n
against all or any of the other defendants. But, it has to be noted that<\/p>\n
the applicability of the proviso has to be considered by the court at<\/p>\n
the time of setting aside the ex parte decree and not at a later stage<\/p>\n
after the restoration of the suit on setting aside the ex parte decree<\/p>\n
at the instance of any other defendant who had not applied for<\/p>\n
setting aside the ex parte decree against him.\n<\/p>\n
       5. Normally, in the case of a money claim, the general rule is<\/p>\n
that the ex parte decree is not set aside for the codefendant other<\/p>\n
than the applicant who has moved for setting aside the ex parte<\/p>\n
decree. In Vasant v. Tukaram (AIR 1960 Bombay 485) where a suit<\/p>\n
for damages was instituted against three defendants who were<\/p>\n
partners and it was decreed ex parte against one of them, and<\/p>\n
against the other two after hearing them, and the ex parte defendant<\/p>\n
applied to set it aside, it was held no order should be made setting it<\/p>\n
aside against the other defendants also. The allegation in P1 plaint<\/p>\n
that the first defendant is a proprietary concern and the second and<\/p>\n
W.P.C.No.31870\/09                 – 6 –<\/span><\/p>\n
third defendants are having interest and control over the first<\/p>\n
defendant, which has been canvassed to contend that the ex parte<\/p>\n
decree passed against the second defendant has also to be treated as<\/p>\n
set aside on the allowing of the application moved by the other<\/p>\n
defendants for setting aside the ex parte decree, applying the first<\/p>\n
proviso to Rule 13 of Order 9 of the C.P.C., in the given facts of the<\/p>\n
case and the principles of law applicable, is found to be devoid of any<\/p>\n
merit. I do not find any impropriety or illegality in P7 order passed by<\/p>\n
the court below. Writ Petition lacks merit, and it is dismissed.<\/p>\n
srd                           S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Shiva vs The Fertilizer & Chemicals … on 9 November, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 31870 of 2009(O) 1. SHIVA, S\/O.GOVIND NAIK, D.NO.E-44-1, … Petitioner Vs 1. THE FERTILIZER & CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE … Respondent 2. CHIEF DISTRIBUTION MANAGER, 3. NAVADURGA WAREHOUSING CORPORATION, 4. SUJAYANAND, S\/O.SHIVA NAIK, OCC: […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-208146","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nShiva vs The Fertilizer & Chemicals ... on 9 November, 2009 - 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\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shiva vs The Fertilizer & Chemicals ... on 9 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-11-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-28T23:35:21+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=\"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\\\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shiva vs The Fertilizer & Chemicals … on 9 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-28T23:35:21+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1302,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009\",\"name\":\"Shiva vs The Fertilizer & Chemicals ... on 9 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-28T23:35:21+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shiva vs The Fertilizer & Chemicals … on 9 November, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Shiva vs The Fertilizer & Chemicals ... on 9 November, 2009 - 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\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shiva vs The Fertilizer & Chemicals ... on 9 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-28T23:35:21+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shiva vs The Fertilizer & Chemicals … on 9 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-28T23:35:21+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009"},"wordCount":1302,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009","name":"Shiva vs The Fertilizer & Chemicals ... on 9 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-28T23:35:21+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shiva-vs-the-fertilizer-chemicals-on-9-november-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shiva vs The Fertilizer & Chemicals … on 9 November, 2009"}]},{"@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\/208146","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=208146"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/208146\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=208146"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=208146"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=208146"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}