{"id":211974,"date":"2009-09-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-08-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009"},"modified":"2015-07-15T13:50:54","modified_gmt":"2015-07-15T08:20:54","slug":"r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009","title":{"rendered":"R.Justin Arulappa vs R.Xavier Arulappa on 1 September, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">R.Justin Arulappa vs R.Xavier Arulappa on 1 September, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 01\/09\/2009\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE ARUNA JAGADEESAN\n\nCRP(PD)No.839 of 2009\nMP.No.1 of 2009\n\nR.Justin Arulappa\t\t\t\t... Petitioner\n\nVs\n\n1. R.Xavier Arulappa\n2. Gerayana Rani\t\t\t\t... Respondents\n\nPrayer\n\nThis Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dated 21.4.2009\nmade in IA.No.98\/2009 in OS.No.54\/2009 on the file of the II Additional Sub\nJudge, Nagercoil.\n\n!For Petitioner\t   ...\tMr.T.Selvakumar\n^For Respondent    ...\tMr.R.JOseph Thankaran-R1\n\t\t\tMr.C.Sankar Prakash-R2\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>    This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the 1st defendant against<br \/>\nthe order dated 21.4.2009 passed in IA.No.98\/2009 in OS.No.54\/2009 by the<br \/>\nlearned II Additional Sub Judge, Nagercoil.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t2.  The 1st respondent\/plaintiff has filed the above said suit for<br \/>\ndeclaration of plaintiff&#8217;s title and recovery of possession of the plaint<br \/>\nschedule property from the defendants and to direct the 1st defendant to pay the<br \/>\narrears of licence amount of Rs.90,000\/- for the usage of the schedule mentioned<br \/>\nproperty with 12% interest per annum.  Pending the suit, the 1st respondent has<br \/>\nfiled the said application  for issuance of commission for local investigation<br \/>\nof the schedule mentioned property  in relation  to certain points stated by the<br \/>\n1st respondent in the said application.  The allegations made by the 1st<br \/>\nrespondent is that the petitioner has annexed certain portion of land with the<br \/>\nproperty of the petitioner on the western side and issuance of commission is<br \/>\nfiled to segregate the annexed portion from the petitioner&#8217;s possession and for<br \/>\nmesne profits for the usage of the disputed portion.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t3.  Strangely, though the court below has observed in its order that<br \/>\na commission cannot be issued to separate the schedule mentioned property, to<br \/>\nassess the mesne profits and to fix the rent for the building, however, it<br \/>\nappointed an Advocate Commissioner for the purposes as required by the 1st<br \/>\nrespondent.  Admittedly, the appointment of the Advocate Commissioner was<br \/>\nwithout even notice to the petitioner. Though it is not obligatory on the court<br \/>\nto issue notice to the other side before issuing commission, but natural justice<br \/>\nrequires that such an order should not be passed without notice to one of the<br \/>\nparties.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t4.  In case of this nature, where the dispute between the parties<br \/>\nrelates to the determination of question of encroachment made by the other<br \/>\nparty, it is necessary that the other party should be  given notice and allow<br \/>\nhim to put forth his defence before issuing a commission to visit the suit<br \/>\nproperty and to make even the local investigation.  It is rightly pointed out by<br \/>\nthe learned counsel for the petitioner that the appointment of an Advocate<br \/>\nCommissioner cannot be utilized for the purpose of gathering or collecting<br \/>\nevidence by other party in any proceedings.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t5.  The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the<br \/>\njudgement of the Division Bench of this court rendered in the case  of<br \/>\nK.Mariappan and five others Vs. Chennaivazh Nadrgal Sangam and three others<br \/>\n[1996-I-CTC-148] and contended that there cannot be a commission for noting down<br \/>\nthe physical features as set out in the petition filed by the 1st respondent in<br \/>\nhis petition and the Advocate Commissioner cannot divide the property and there<br \/>\nis no necessity or justification to appoint an Advocate Commissioner for the<br \/>\nsaid purpose.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t6.  The points to be noted by the Advocate Commissioner have been<br \/>\nstated in the petition filed by the 1st respondent, which is extracted below for<br \/>\neasy reference:-\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;1. To identify and separate the schedule property from the I defendant property<br \/>\non the western side with the assistance of Taluk Surveyor, Agasteeswaram Taluk<br \/>\nat Nagercoil.\n<\/p>\n<p>2. To note the natue of the building in the schedule property and the business<br \/>\nconducted there in and to assess the mesne profits for the building in usage.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.  To note the incumbents in the building in the schedule property and their<br \/>\nutilisation of the said building.\n<\/p>\n<p>4. To fix the rent of the building through the assistance of Assistant Engineer,<br \/>\nPWD (Building) at Nagercoil.\n<\/p>\n<p>5. To note such other points as the plaintiff requires at the time of commission<br \/>\nvisit.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>The above said features cannot be noted down by the Advocate Commissioner, as it<br \/>\nwould amount to collection of evidence in favour of one party.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t7.  This court in the case of Rangasamy Vs. The Superintending<br \/>\nEngineer, TNEB, Mettur Electricity System, Mettur Dam, Salem District and others<br \/>\n[2006-5-CTC-501] has held that the object of the local investigation under Order<br \/>\n26 Rule 9 of CPC is not to collect evidence and the court should not appoint an<br \/>\nAdvocate Commissioner for taking measurement of the suit property  in a<br \/>\nmechanical manner without considering the need for such an appointment.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t8.  In yet another decision reported in the case of S.Palanisamy<br \/>\nGounder Vs. N.Palanisamy and three others [2007-1-CTC-611], this court has<br \/>\nobserved that though the said local investigation by the Advocate Commissioner<br \/>\ncan be done at the earlier stage of litigation regarding identification,<br \/>\nlocation and measurement of land or premises, the report can be used as a<br \/>\nguiding factor in the process of decision making and not to be used as a basis<br \/>\nof decision making.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t9.  In the instant case, the court below has not even chosen to give<br \/>\na prima facie finding for the purpose of issuance of commission without notice<br \/>\nto the other party.  The need to have resorted to Order 26 Rule 9 of CPC ought<br \/>\nto be felt by the court for the purpose of elucidating certain details and it<br \/>\ncannot mechanically appoint an Advocate Commissioner without focussing attention<br \/>\nas to what are the questions of dispute and whether for deciding the disputed<br \/>\nquestion the appointment was necessary.  But, in this case, utter disregard to<br \/>\nthe above said principles, the court below had appointed an Advocate<br \/>\nCommissioner to make local investigation as requested by the 1st respondent<br \/>\nwithout even considering whether such issuance of commission is warranted at<br \/>\nthis stage.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t10.  Therefore, I have no hesitation to hold that  the impugned<br \/>\norder of the court below is improper and suffers from illegality.  In the event<br \/>\nof a local investigation being made by the Advocate Commissioner pursuant to the<br \/>\nissuance of such a commission, then the said report will be regarded as<br \/>\ninadmissible and non est.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t11.  For the reasons aforesaid, the impugned order passed by the<br \/>\ncourt below is liable to be set aside and accordingly, it is set aside and this<br \/>\nCivil Revision Petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, the connected MP is<br \/>\nclosed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Srcm<\/p>\n<p>To:\n<\/p>\n<p>The II Additional Sub Judge, Nagercoil<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court R.Justin Arulappa vs R.Xavier Arulappa on 1 September, 2009 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01\/09\/2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE ARUNA JAGADEESAN CRP(PD)No.839 of 2009 MP.No.1 of 2009 R.Justin Arulappa &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. R.Xavier Arulappa 2. Gerayana Rani &#8230; Respondents Prayer This Civil Revision Petition is filed against [&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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-211974","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>R.Justin Arulappa vs R.Xavier Arulappa on 1 September, 2009 - 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\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"R.Justin Arulappa vs R.Xavier Arulappa on 1 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-07-15T08:20:54+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\\\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"R.Justin Arulappa vs R.Xavier Arulappa on 1 September, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-15T08:20:54+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1013,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009\",\"name\":\"R.Justin Arulappa vs R.Xavier Arulappa on 1 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-15T08:20:54+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"R.Justin Arulappa vs R.Xavier Arulappa on 1 September, 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":"R.Justin Arulappa vs R.Xavier Arulappa on 1 September, 2009 - 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\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"R.Justin Arulappa vs R.Xavier Arulappa on 1 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-07-15T08:20:54+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\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"R.Justin Arulappa vs R.Xavier Arulappa on 1 September, 2009","datePublished":"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-15T08:20:54+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009"},"wordCount":1013,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009","name":"R.Justin Arulappa vs R.Xavier Arulappa on 1 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-15T08:20:54+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-justin-arulappa-vs-r-xavier-arulappa-on-1-september-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"R.Justin Arulappa vs R.Xavier Arulappa on 1 September, 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\/211974","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=211974"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/211974\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=211974"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=211974"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=211974"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}