{"id":211292,"date":"2009-01-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-12-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009"},"modified":"2015-09-22T00:50:18","modified_gmt":"2015-09-21T19:20:18","slug":"gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009","title":{"rendered":"Gian Chand vs Jaspal Kaur And Others on 1 January, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Gian Chand vs Jaspal Kaur And Others on 1 January, 2009<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA\n              AT CHANDIGARH\n\n\n\n                                    F.A.O. No. 611 of 1993 (O&M)\n                                    Date of Decision : January 06 , 2009\n\nGian Chand\n                                                            .....Appellant\n                                Versus\nJaspal Kaur and others\n                                                         .....Respondents\n\n\nCORAM : HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN\n\nPresent :    Mr. Deepak Suri, Advocate\n             for the appellant.\n\n             Mr. Amarjit Markan, Advocate\n             for respondents No. 1 and 2.\n\n\nT.P.S. MANN, J.\n<\/pre>\n
             Judgment dated 26.11.1992 passed by the Motor Accidents<\/p>\n
Claims Tribunal, Sangrur, while allowing the claim petition filed by<\/p>\n
respondents No.1 and 2 and directing the appellant and respondents<\/p>\n
No.3 and 4 to pay a sum of Rs.8,00,000\/- as compensation to the<\/p>\n
claimants alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from the date of the<\/p>\n
accident, stands challenged in the present appeal filed under Section 173<\/p>\n
of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for short ‘the Act’, preferred by the<\/p>\n
owner of the offending jeep.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
             According to the claim petition filed by respondents No.1
\n F.A.O. No. 611 of 1993 (O&M)                                    -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
and 2, Amrik Singh, since deceased, was travelling on a scooter and<\/p>\n
going from Chajjli to Sunam on 9.2.1990. A jeep bearing registration<\/p>\n
No.HRF-2777 driven by Gurcharan Singh alias Bholla-respondent No.3<\/p>\n
and owned by Gian Chand-appellant, while being driven rashly and<\/p>\n
negligently, struck against the scooter. As a result, Amarik Singh<\/p>\n
received injuries and died at the spot. The occurrence was witnessed by<\/p>\n
Bhupinder Singh. Pleading that the claimants, who were widow and<\/p>\n
mother of Amrik Singh, deceased were dependent upon him, they filed a<\/p>\n
petition under Section 166 of the Act for awarding them an amount of<\/p>\n
Rs.8,00,000\/- as compensation.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            The claim petition was opposed by the driver, the owner and<\/p>\n
the insurer of the jeep.   It was pleaded by them that the scooterist had<\/p>\n
emerged suddenly from behind a tractor-trolley. However, there was no<\/p>\n
negligence or rash driving on the part of the driver of the offending jeep.<\/p>\n
            On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, learned Tribunal<\/p>\n
framed the following issues :-\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
             1.       Whether the death of Amrik Singh took
\n                      place by the rash and negligent driving of
\n                      respondent No. 1 as alleged in the
\n                      petition ? OPP.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             2.       Whether the petitioners are the L.Rs of
\n                      the deceased ? OPP.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
 F.A.O. No. 611 of 1993 (O&M)                                  -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
            3.       Whether the petitioners are entitled to
\n                     recover the compensation, claimed in the
\n                     petition, from the respondents ? OPP.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            The claimants had examined Darshan Singh PW1, Mohinder<\/p>\n
Kaur PW2 and Gurmail Singh PW3 in support of their claim petition,<\/p>\n
whereas the respondents did not lead any evidence. After going through<\/p>\n
the evidence brought on the record and hearing learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
parties, learned Tribunal held that the accident was caused due to rash<\/p>\n
and negligent driving of the jeep by Gurcharan Singh alias Bholla, as a<\/p>\n
result of which Amrik Singh died. The claimants were held to be the legal<\/p>\n
heirs of the deceased, being his widow and mother, respectively. The<\/p>\n
monthly salary of the deceased was determined at Rs.1,200\/- and the<\/p>\n
dependency calculated at the rate of Rs.800\/- per month. As the deceased<\/p>\n
was 25 years of age and was to retire from service on attaining the age of<\/p>\n
58\/60 years, multiplier of 33 was applied so as to arrive at a figure of<\/p>\n
Rs.3,16,800\/-. As the deceased was also an agriculturalist and doing dairy<\/p>\n
farming, it was held that he must have been earning Rs.50,000\/- per year,<\/p>\n
and, thus, the claimants entitled to claim compensation on this account at<\/p>\n
the rate of Rs. 40,000\/- per year for a period of 33 years, i.e.<\/p>\n
Rs.13,20,000\/-. The total compensation was, thus, determined as<\/p>\n
Rs.16,36,800\/-. However, as the claimants had only sought a sum of<\/p>\n
Rs.8,00,000\/- as compensation, they were awarded the said amount to be<\/p>\n
paid to them by the driver, the owner and the insurer of the jeep<\/p>\n
alongwith interest @ 12% per annum, as mentioned above.
\n F.A.O. No. 611 of 1993 (O&M)                                  -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
            It may not be out of place to mention here that the present<\/p>\n
appeal was initially filed by the New India Assurance Company Limited,<\/p>\n
being insurer of the jeep and Gian Chand-owner of the jeep. On April 21,<\/p>\n
1993, when notice of motion was issued, recovery beyond Rs.3,00,000\/-<\/p>\n
was stayed.     The amount of Rs.3,00,000\/-, including the amount<\/p>\n
deposited with the appeal, was ordered to be disbursed to the claimants in<\/p>\n
terms of the award against the security to the satisfaction of the learned<\/p>\n
Tribunal. Later on, the appeal was admitted. An application bearing C.M.<\/p>\n
No.20265-CII of 2006 was, thereafter, filed by the appellants with a<\/p>\n
prayer for transposing the Insurance Company-appellant No.1 as a<\/p>\n
respondent in the appeal. This application was allowed on July 05, 2007<\/p>\n
and the Insurance Company was ordered to be transposed as the<\/p>\n
respondent. Pursuant thereto, the sole appellant in the present appeal is<\/p>\n
Gian Chand-owner of the offending jeep, whereas Insurance Company<\/p>\n
has been arrayed as respondent No. 4.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the<\/p>\n
accident in question did not take place on account of driving of the jeep<\/p>\n
by Gurcharan Singh, as he was neither rash nor negligent in doing so.<\/p>\n
After the accident, an FIR was lodged by Gurmail Singh PW3, brother of<\/p>\n
the deceased, wherein he stated that the accident took place by chance as<\/p>\n
the driver of the jeep applied brakes suddenly while saving a mule cart<\/p>\n
as the mule became frightened and the jeep struck against the scooter.<\/p>\n
Moreover, the scooterist had emerged all of a sudden from behind a
\n F.A.O. No. 611 of 1993 (O&M)                                   -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
tractor trolley and came in front of the jeep. While doing so, it was the<\/p>\n
scootertist who was rash, negligent and careless, besides not observing<\/p>\n
traffic rules. As a result, he struck against the jeep driven by Gurcharan<\/p>\n
Singh. It is also submitted that there was no documentary proof brought<\/p>\n
on the record to show that the deceased was drawing any salary from Lok<\/p>\n
Priya General Finance and Investments Limited. Therefore, it could not<\/p>\n
be held that the deceased was earning Rs.1,200\/- per month. Moreover,<\/p>\n
there was no land with the deceased and in case he had any such land, his<\/p>\n
legal heirs must be earning something from the same. Besides, multiplier<\/p>\n
of 33 applied by the learned Tribunal was on the higher side.<\/p>\n
Accordingly, it has been prayed that the claim petition be dismissed, or,<\/p>\n
in any case, the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal<\/p>\n
be reduced drastically.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            Learned counsel for the claimants\/respondents has opposed<\/p>\n
the appeal by submitting that it was the driver of the offending jeep, who<\/p>\n
was rash and negligent while driving, which caused accident and as a<\/p>\n
result of which Amrik Singh died. Darshan Singh PW1 and Gurmail<\/p>\n
Singh PW3 had seen the occurrence as they were also proceeding on the<\/p>\n
same road when the accident had taken place. As the offending jeep had<\/p>\n
been deployed by Bareta Police, the signatures of Darshan Singh and<\/p>\n
Gurmail Singh were obtained by the police on blank papers, which were<\/p>\n
later on used for fabricating an incorrect version that Amrik Singh,<\/p>\n
deceased, himself was rash and negligent in driving the scooter. It is also
\n F.A.O. No. 611 of 1993 (O&M)                                    -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
submitted that the deceased was 25 years of age and earning Rs.1,200\/-<\/p>\n
per month from the Lok Priya General Finance and Investment Limited,<\/p>\n
Sangrur. The deceased was also an agriculturist by profession, besides<\/p>\n
running a dairy. He was getting income of Rs.50,000\/- from these two<\/p>\n
occupations. The multiplier of 33 was rightly applied as the deceased was<\/p>\n
to retire from the finance company in about 35 years’ time. Accordingly,<\/p>\n
it has been submitted that no case was made out for the grant of any<\/p>\n
interference in the findings arrived at by the learned Tribunal and,<\/p>\n
therefore, appeal be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            I have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their<\/p>\n
able, assistance perused the records.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            As regards the accident in question, Darshan Singh PW1 and<\/p>\n
Gurmail Singh PW3 deposed before the learned Tribunal that it was<\/p>\n
caused by the driver of the jeep, who was rash and negligent in driving<\/p>\n
the same. Though an FIR stood registered on the basis of a statement<\/p>\n
made by Gurmail Singh, but it is borne from the records that offending<\/p>\n
jeep had been deployed by the police. In such like situation, possibility<\/p>\n
of a false version being recorded and, that too, at the behest of the police<\/p>\n
so as to avoid incurring of any liability regarding the accident in which a<\/p>\n
person had lost his life, cannot be ruled out. It was mentioned in the claim<\/p>\n
petition that the police obtained signatures of Darshan Singh and Gurmail<\/p>\n
Singh on blank papers. Apparently those blank papers were, later on,
\n F.A.O. No. 611 of 1993 (O&M)                                  -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
used by the police so as to show that the accident had taken place by<\/p>\n
chance and the jeep driver was not negligent at all in causing the<\/p>\n
accident. Even otherwise, there is no material available on the record<\/p>\n
from which it could be made out that it was the deceased, who was rash,<\/p>\n
negligent and careless in driving the scooter or not observing the traffic<\/p>\n
rules when he struck against the offending jeep. In view of the above, the<\/p>\n
findings arrived at by the learned Tribunal that the accident was caused<\/p>\n
due to rash and negligent driving of the jeep by Gurcharan Singh, as a<\/p>\n
result of which Amrik Singh died, is confirmed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            The deceased was 25 years of age at the time of his death.<\/p>\n
He was in the employment of a finance company from where he was<\/p>\n
drawing a monthly salary of Rs.1,200\/- per month. Therefore, the<\/p>\n
dependency could be easily calculated at the rate of Rs.800\/- per month.<\/p>\n
            In the claim petition, it was mentioned that apart from being<\/p>\n
an employee of the finance company, the deceased was also an<\/p>\n
agriculturist by profession, besides doing dairy farming. Mohinder Kaur,<\/p>\n
while appearing as PW2, deposed that the deceased had been earning<\/p>\n
Rs.1,00,000\/- from cultivation of land and after his death income from<\/p>\n
the land had diminished.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            During the pendency of the appeal, C.M. No.18612-CII of<\/p>\n
2006 under Order XLI Rule 27 C.P.C. was filed by the claimants for<\/p>\n
placing on record birth certificate Annexure P.1 and school certificate
\n F.A.O. No. 611 of 1993 (O&M)                                   -8-<\/span><\/p>\n
Ex. P.2 of Sukhpreet Kaur, daughter of the deceased and Jamabandies<\/p>\n
Annexure P.3 for the year 1966-67 and Annexure P.4 for the year<\/p>\n
1991-92 by way of additional evidence. Learned counsel for the appellant<\/p>\n
had sought time to file a reply to the application but no such reply ever<\/p>\n
came to be filed. In view of the same, the said application was allowed.<\/p>\n
A perusal of the Jamabandies would reveal that Bhagwan Singh and<\/p>\n
Mohinder Kaur, father and mother, respectively, of Amrik Singh,<\/p>\n
deceased had 1\/4th share each in agricultural land measuring 301 Kanals<\/p>\n
2 Marlas. Their total share, thus, came to about 19 killas. Apart from<\/p>\n
Amrik Singh, deceased, his parents had another son, who was aged 18<\/p>\n
years. Thus, Amrik Singh, deceased was owner and in occupation of<\/p>\n
about 9\u00bd acres of land through his parents. It has been admitted by<\/p>\n
Mohinder Kaur PW2 that after the death of her son Amrik Singh, income<\/p>\n
from the land had diminished. Therefore, this Court can reasonably assess<\/p>\n
the annual income of the deceased from agricultural operations and dairy<\/p>\n
farming to be Rs.45,000\/-. After deducting an amount of Rs.10,000\/-<\/p>\n
towards the expenses incurred in the agricultural operations as well as the<\/p>\n
money spent by the deceased upon himself, an amount of Rs.35,000\/- can<\/p>\n
be held to have been handed over by him to the claimants-respondents.<\/p>\n
Adding the income from the finance company to the income derived from<\/p>\n
agricultural operations, etc., the deceased had been contributing an<\/p>\n
amount of Rs.44,600\/- per annum.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            As regards the multiplier, the one applied by the learned
\n F.A.O. No. 611 of 1993 (O&M)                                        -9-<\/span><\/p>\n
Tribunal was on the higher side. As the age of the deceased at the time of<\/p>\n
the accident, was 25 years, multiplier of 18 can safely be applied so as to<\/p>\n
determine the final amount of compensation in the appeal. Once the<\/p>\n
multiplier of 18 is applied to the annual dependency of Rs.44,600\/-, the<\/p>\n
amount of compensation works out to be Rs.8,02,800\/-. However, as the<\/p>\n
claimants\/respondents had themselves prayed for granting an amount of<\/p>\n
Rs.8,00,000\/- only as compensation, their prayer, as such, has to be<\/p>\n
accepted.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            In view of the above discussion, it is held that the annual<\/p>\n
income derived by the deceased from agricultural operations was<\/p>\n
Rs.45,000\/- and dependency on that count was Rs.35,000\/- annually.<\/p>\n
However, the multiplier of ’33’ applied by the learned Tribunal is reduced<\/p>\n
to ’18’. At the same time, the amount of Rs.8,00,000\/- granted by the<\/p>\n
learned Tribunal to the claimants as compensation alongwith interest @<\/p>\n
12% per annum from the date of the accident, i.e. 9.2.1990 is upheld.<\/p>\n
The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n\n                                                  ( T.P.S. MANN )\nJanuary 06, 2009                                      JUDGE\nsatish\n\n\n\n\n               Whether to be referred to the Reporters : YES \/ NO\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Gian Chand vs Jaspal Kaur And Others on 1 January, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O. No. 611 of 1993 (O&M) Date of Decision : January 06 , 2009 Gian Chand …..Appellant Versus Jaspal Kaur and others …..Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present […]<\/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-211292","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nGian Chand vs Jaspal Kaur And Others on 1 January, 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\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Gian Chand vs Jaspal Kaur And Others on 1 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-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=\"2008-12-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-09-21T19:20:18+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=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Gian Chand vs Jaspal Kaur And Others on 1 January, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-21T19:20:18+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009\"},\"wordCount\":2121,\"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\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009\",\"name\":\"Gian Chand vs Jaspal Kaur And Others on 1 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-21T19:20:18+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Gian Chand vs Jaspal Kaur And Others on 1 January, 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:\/\/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":"Gian Chand vs Jaspal Kaur And Others on 1 January, 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\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Gian Chand vs Jaspal Kaur And Others on 1 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-12-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-09-21T19:20:18+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":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Gian Chand vs Jaspal Kaur And Others on 1 January, 2009","datePublished":"2008-12-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-21T19:20:18+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009"},"wordCount":2121,"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\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009","name":"Gian Chand vs Jaspal Kaur And Others on 1 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-12-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-21T19:20:18+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gian-chand-vs-jaspal-kaur-and-others-on-1-january-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Gian Chand vs Jaspal Kaur And Others on 1 January, 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:\/\/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\/211292","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=211292"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/211292\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=211292"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=211292"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=211292"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}