{"id":217073,"date":"2010-12-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-12-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010"},"modified":"2017-06-24T10:43:22","modified_gmt":"2017-06-24T05:13:22","slug":"kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010","title":{"rendered":"Kalaperumal vs The Joint Commissioner on 7 December, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Kalaperumal vs The Joint Commissioner on 7 December, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 07\/12\/2010\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR\n\nW.P.(MD).No.210 of 2010\n&amp;\nM.P(MD)No.1 of 2010\n\nKalaperumal\t\t\t\t\t... Petitioner\n\nVs\n\n1.The Joint Commissioner,\n  Hindu Religious and\n  Charitable Endowment Department,\n  Tirunelveli-2,\n  Tirunelveli District.\n\n2.The Government of Tamil Nadu,\n  Rep.by its Secretary,\n  Hindu Religious and\n  Charitable Endowment Department,\n  Chennai.\t\t\t\t\t... Respondents\n\nPRAYER\n\nPetition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for\nissuance of a Writ of Certiorarified to call for the records pertaining to the\nproceedings of the first respondent in Se.Mu.Na.Ka.5769\/2009\/B1 dated 24.07.2009\nand quash the same.\n\n!For Petitioner\t... Mr.V.Kannan\n^For Respondents... Mr.K.M.Vijayakumar,\n\t\t    Addl.Govt.Pleader.\n\t\t\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tThe prayer in the writ petition is to quash the order dated 24.07.2009<br \/>\nappointing a fit person to  Arulmigu Kodimadasamy Temple at Tirunelveli.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. The said order was passed on the ground that after the demise of the<br \/>\npetitioner&#8217;s father, the petitioner functioned only as an administer of the said<br \/>\nTemple and no authority has recognized him as a hereditary trustee due to the<br \/>\npendency of O.A.No.1 of 2005 filed by one of the sons of the petitioner&#8217;s father<br \/>\nthrough the first wife.  On perusal of the impugned order it is evident that it<br \/>\nhas been passed not only on the ground of pendency of the application, but also<br \/>\non the ground of certain allegations that the petitioner while administering the<br \/>\ntemple has not conducted &#8220;Chithiri Festival&#8221; and poojas due to the death of one<br \/>\nof his relative due to which a complaint was given by the public on 13.04.2009.<br \/>\nThus, it is evident from the said order that based on certain allegations, the<br \/>\nimpugned order was passed, removing the petitioner from the administer of the<br \/>\ntemple pending O.A.No.1 of 2005 that too without notice and consequently a fit<br \/>\nperson has been appointed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3.It is a well settled principles of law that when an order is passed<br \/>\nagainst a person based on some allegations, the person should be issued notice<br \/>\nand then only orders can be passed after hearing his objections.  The<br \/>\npetitioner&#8217;s father died in the year 2003 and until the impugned order was<br \/>\npassed, the petitioner even though was not recognized as a hereditary trustee,<br \/>\nhe functioned as an administer of the said temple.  Therefore, the order of the<br \/>\nfirst respondent without issuing notice or an opportunity of hearing, based on<br \/>\nthe allegations cannot be sustained as it is violation of Audi alteram partem.<br \/>\nIn Uma Nath Pandey v. State of UP reported in AIR 2009 SCC 2375, in paragraph<br \/>\nNos.15,16 and 19, the Supreme Court held as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t15. Concept of natural justice has undergone a great deal of change in<br \/>\nrecent years. Rules of natural justice are not rules embodied always expressly<br \/>\nin a statute or in rules framed thereunder. They may be implied from the nature<br \/>\nof the duty to be performed under a statute. What particular rule of natural<br \/>\njustice should be implied and what its context should be in a given case must<br \/>\ndepend to a great extent on the fact and circumstances of that case, the frame-<br \/>\nwork of the statute under which the enquiry is held. The old distinction between<br \/>\na judicial act and an administrative act has withered away. Even an<br \/>\nadministrative order which involves civil consequences must be consistent with<br \/>\nthe rules of natural justice. Expression `civil consequences&#8217; encompasses<br \/>\ninfraction of not merely property or personal rights but of civil liberties,<br \/>\nmaterial deprivations, and non-pecuniary damages. In its wide umbrella comes<br \/>\neverything that affects a citizen in his civil life.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;16. Natural justice has been variously defined by different Judges. A few<br \/>\ninstances will suffice. In Drew v. Drew and Lebura (1855(2) Macg. 1.8, Lord<br \/>\nCranworth defined it as `universal justice&#8217;. In James Dunber Smith v. Her<br \/>\nMajesty the Queen (1877-78(3) App.Case 614, 623 JC) Sir Robort P. Collier,<br \/>\nspeaking for the judicial committee of Privy council, used the 8<br \/>\nphrase `the requirements of substantial justice&#8217;, while in Arthur John Specman<br \/>\nv. Plumstead District Board of Works (1884-85(10) App.Case 229, 240), Earl of<br \/>\nSelbourne, S.C. preferred the phrase `the substantial requirement of justice&#8217;.<br \/>\nIn Vionet v. Barrett (1885(55) LJRD 39, 41), Lord Esher, MR defined natural<br \/>\njustice as `the natural sense of what is right and wrong&#8217;. While, however,<br \/>\ndeciding Hookings v. Smethwick Local Board of Health (1890(24) QBD 712), Lord<br \/>\nFasher, M.R. instead of using the definition given earlier by him in Vionet&#8217;s<br \/>\ncase (supra) chose to define natural justice as `fundamental justice&#8217;. In Ridge<br \/>\nv. Baldwin (1963(1) WB 569, 578), Harman LJ, in the Court of Appeal countered<br \/>\nnatural justice with `fair-play in action&#8217; a phrase favoured by Bhagawati, J. in<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/1766147\/\">Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India<\/a> (1978 (2) SCR 621). In re R.N. (An Infant)<br \/>\n(1967(2) B617, 530), Lord Parker, CJ, preferred to describe natural justice as<br \/>\n`a duty to act fairly&#8217;. In fairmount Investments Ltd. v. Secretary to State for<br \/>\nEnvironment (1976 WLR 1255) Lord Russell of Willowan somewhat picturesquely<br \/>\ndescribed natural justice as `a fair crack of the whip&#8217; while Geoffrey Lane, LJ.<br \/>\nIn Regina v. Secretary of State for Home Affairs Ex Parte Hosenball (1977 (1)<br \/>\nWLR 766) preferred the homely phrase `common fairness&#8217;.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t19. Natural justice is the essence of fair adjudication, deeply rooted in<br \/>\ntradition and conscience, to be ranked as fundamental. The purpose of following<br \/>\nthe principles of natural justice is the prevention of miscarriage of justice.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4.Applying the said judgment to the facts of the present case, I am of the<br \/>\nview that the petitioner has made out a case to quash the impugned order. The<br \/>\nlearned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the fit person has not taken<br \/>\ncharge and the temple being a family temple he may be permitted to function.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5.In view of the above, the impugned order dated 24.07.2009 passed by the<br \/>\nfirst respondent is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the first<br \/>\nrespondent, who shall issue notice to the petitioner and pass fresh orders after<br \/>\nhearing his objections.  Since the impugned order is set aside, status-quo as on<br \/>\ndate is ordered to be maintained till fresh orders are passed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6.The writ petition is allowed in the above terms. No costs. Consequently,<br \/>\nconnected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>gsr<\/p>\n<p>To\n<\/p>\n<p>1.The Joint Commissioner,<br \/>\n  Hindu Religious and<br \/>\n  Charitable Endowment Department,<br \/>\n  Tirunelveli-2,Tirunelveli District.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The Government of Tamil Nadu,<br \/>\n  Rep.by its Secretary,<br \/>\n  Hindu Religious and<br \/>\n  Charitable Endowment Department,<br \/>\n  Chennai.\t<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Kalaperumal vs The Joint Commissioner on 7 December, 2010 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07\/12\/2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR W.P.(MD).No.210 of 2010 &amp; M.P(MD)No.1 of 2010 Kalaperumal &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Tirunelveli-2, Tirunelveli District. 2.The Government of Tamil [&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-217073","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>Kalaperumal vs The Joint Commissioner on 7 December, 2010 - 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\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kalaperumal vs The Joint Commissioner on 7 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-12-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-06-24T05:13:22+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\\\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kalaperumal vs The Joint Commissioner on 7 December, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-24T05:13:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010\"},\"wordCount\":947,\"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\\\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010\",\"name\":\"Kalaperumal vs The Joint Commissioner on 7 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-24T05:13:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kalaperumal vs The Joint Commissioner on 7 December, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Kalaperumal vs The Joint Commissioner on 7 December, 2010 - 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\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kalaperumal vs The Joint Commissioner on 7 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-12-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-06-24T05:13:22+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\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kalaperumal vs The Joint Commissioner on 7 December, 2010","datePublished":"2010-12-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-24T05:13:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010"},"wordCount":947,"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\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010","name":"Kalaperumal vs The Joint Commissioner on 7 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-12-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-24T05:13:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kalaperumal-vs-the-joint-commissioner-on-7-december-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kalaperumal vs The Joint Commissioner on 7 December, 2010"}]},{"@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\/217073","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=217073"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/217073\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=217073"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=217073"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=217073"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}