{"id":212116,"date":"1998-05-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1998-05-25T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998"},"modified":"2017-11-20T04:20:59","modified_gmt":"2017-11-19T22:50:59","slug":"chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998","title":{"rendered":"Chand Bal vs Kamal Kumar on 26 May, 1998"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Delhi High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Chand Bal vs Kamal Kumar on 26 May, 1998<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1998 IVAD Delhi 429, 73 (1998) DLT 631<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: J Goel<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: J Goel<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<pre><\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>J.B. Goel, J.<\/p>\n<p>1.      I have heard learned Counsel for the plaintiff on the question whether the  suit has been properly valued for purposes of Court fee and  jurisdiction at the admission stage.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.   The case is that late Shri Des Raj was a tenant in respect of shop No. 2372,  Chuna Mandi, Paharganj at a monthly rent of Rs. 22\/- under  deceased Shri Makhan Lal and defendants 1 and 2 as his sons. Shri Des Raj died as  a contractual  tenant  and  the tenancy was inherited by  the  plaintiffs  as tenants.  It is alleged that Shri Makhan Lal filed petition  for  eviction. That petition was dismissed on 21.4.1998.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.   Defendants  No. 1 and 2 are alleged to have sold the said property  to defendant  No.3 who is threatening to illegally dispossess  the  plaintiffs from the suit premises and accordingly the plaintiffs have filed this  suit for  perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from so  dispossessing the plaintiffs.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.   The suit for purposes of Court fee and jurisdiction has been valued at Rs.  5,05,000\/-. I have heard learned Counsel for the plaintiff about  this valuation  and  under  which provision the suit has  been  valued.  Learned Counsel  contended  that the suit has been valued under Section  7  of  the Court  Fees Act under which the plaintiff could value the suit for  injunction at whatever value he considered proper. Sub-clause (d) of Clause  (iv) of Section 7 of the Court Fees Act reads as under:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>     &#8220;7.  The amount of fee payable under this Act in the  suits  next hereinafter mentioned shall be computed as follows:<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (i) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. (ii) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>    (iii) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; (iv) In suits.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (a) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. (b) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. (c) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (d) to obtain an injunction.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (e) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (f) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\n     In  all such suits the plaintiff shall state the amount at  which he values the relief sought:<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>     [Provided  that  the minimum Court fee in each case shall  be  13 (thirteen) rupees]<\/p>\n<p>     The  Supreme  Court  in M\/s. Commercial Aviation &amp;  Travel  Company  &amp;<br \/>\nOthers Vs. Mrs. Vimla Pannalal,  after referring to various decisions  has  observed  that the plaintiff cannot  whimsically  choose  a ridiculous  figure  for filing the suit most arbitrarily  where  there  are positive  materials and\/or objective standards of valuation of  the  relief appearing on the face of the plaint and where there are objective standards of valuation, or in other words, the plaintiff or the Court can  reasonably value the relief correctly on certain definite and positive materials,  the<br \/>\nplaintiff will not be permitted to put an arbitrary valuation de hors  such objective  standards or materials. Inter alia, reference has been  made  to the  case  of Tara Devi Vs. Sri Thakur Radha Krishna Maharaj, ,  where  it  has been laid down that in a suit  for  declaration  with consequential  relief falling under Section (iv)(c) of the Court Fees  Act, the  plaintiff is free to make his own estimation of the relief  sought  in the plaint and such valuation both for purposes of Court fee and  jurisdiction has to be ordinarily accepted; it is only in cases where it appears to the  Court  on a consideration of the facts and circumstances of  the  case that  the  valuation  is arbitrary, unreasonable and the  plaint  has  been demonstratively  undervalued, the Court can examine the valuation  and  can revise  the  same.  In that case, the plaintiff had  valued  the  leasehold interest on the basis of the rent and such valuation was held to be reasonable and not demonstratively arbitrary.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.   The  question  is whether there are objective  standards  or  material available  for valuation of the suit in the present case. Plaintiff  claims to  be tenant and alleges threat of dispossession. Had the  plaintiff  been dispossessed, he would have been entitled to recover the possession and for that  purpose the suit would be valued under Sub-clause (e) of Clause  (xi) of Section 7 of the Court Fees Act which reads as under:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>     (ix) In the following suits between landlord and tenant:<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (a) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (b) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (c) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (d) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (e) to recover the occupancy of [immovable property) from which a tenant has been illegally ejected by the landlord, and <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     (f) &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\n     according  to the amount of the rent of the [immovable  property] to  which  the suit refers payable for the year next  before  the date of presenting the plaint.&#8221;<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>6.   According to this provision, the suit could be valued for the purposes of  possession  at  12 months&#8217; rent preceding the date  of  presenting  the plaint.  On  that basis, the total value would amount to Rs.  264\/-.  Under Section 8 of the Suits Valuation Act, 1887, this would also be the value of the  suit for purposes of jurisdiction. These are the  objective  standards available for assessing the ratable value in this suit and the suit  should be valued at Rs. 264\/- both for purposes of Court fee and jurisdiction. The<br \/>\nvaluation of Rs. 5,05,000\/- fixed by the plaintiff is arbitrary and is  not based  on any valid criteria. If any valuation is fixed at the whim of  the plaintiff,  the suit would be filed either before a Civil Judge  or  before District Judge or in this Court. Section 15 of the Code of Civil  Procedure provides  that  every suit shall be instituted in the Court of  the  lowest grade  competent to try it. The valuation of Rs. 5,05,000\/-  has  obviously been  arbitrarily fixed to institute the suit in the High Court instead  of<br \/>\ninstituting in the Court of the lowest grade which is not proper and justified.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.   In  view  of my above discussion, I hold that the suit  has  not  been properly valued for purposes of Court fee and jurisdiction and it should be valued  at  Rs. 264\/- both for purposes of Court fee and  jurisdiction.  It should  be  correctly valued accordingly. With this valuation,  this  Court will have no jurisdiction.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Plaint be returned to the plaintiff for being presented to a Court  of competent jurisdiction.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Suit not properly valued.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Delhi High Court Chand Bal vs Kamal Kumar on 26 May, 1998 Equivalent citations: 1998 IVAD Delhi 429, 73 (1998) DLT 631 Author: J Goel Bench: J Goel JUDGMENT J.B. Goel, J. 1. I have heard learned Counsel for the plaintiff on the question whether the suit has been properly valued for purposes of Court [&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-212116","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>Chand Bal vs Kamal Kumar on 26 May, 1998 - 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\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Chand Bal vs Kamal Kumar on 26 May, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998\" \/>\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=\"1998-05-25T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-11-19T22:50:59+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\\\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Chand Bal vs Kamal Kumar on 26 May, 1998\",\"datePublished\":\"1998-05-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-19T22:50:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998\"},\"wordCount\":979,\"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\\\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998\",\"name\":\"Chand Bal vs Kamal Kumar on 26 May, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1998-05-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-19T22:50:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Chand Bal vs Kamal Kumar on 26 May, 1998\"}]},{\"@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":"Chand Bal vs Kamal Kumar on 26 May, 1998 - 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\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Chand Bal vs Kamal Kumar on 26 May, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1998-05-25T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-11-19T22:50:59+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\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Chand Bal vs Kamal Kumar on 26 May, 1998","datePublished":"1998-05-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-19T22:50:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998"},"wordCount":979,"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\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998","name":"Chand Bal vs Kamal Kumar on 26 May, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1998-05-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-19T22:50:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-bal-vs-kamal-kumar-on-26-may-1998#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Chand Bal vs Kamal Kumar on 26 May, 1998"}]},{"@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\/212116","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=212116"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/212116\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=212116"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=212116"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=212116"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}