{"id":231022,"date":"2010-08-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-08-25T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010"},"modified":"2016-11-02T19:54:00","modified_gmt":"2016-11-02T14:24:00","slug":"hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010","title":{"rendered":"Hindustan vs United on 26 August, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Hindustan vs United on 26 August, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Jayant Patel,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Bankim.N.Mehta,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nFA\/1876\/2010\t 7\/ 7\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nFIRST\nAPPEAL No. 1876 of 2010\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL  \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo\n\t\t\tbe referred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\nHINDUSTAN\nINDUSTRIES - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nUNITED\nINDIA INSURANCE CO LTD &amp; 2 - Defendant(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance : \nMR\nBHARAT T RAO for\nAppellant(s) : 1, \nNone for Defendant(s) : 1 -\n3. \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 26\/08\/2010 \n\n \n\n \n \n \n\n\n \n\n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL)<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tpresent appeal arises against the judgement and the order dated<br \/>\n\t31.12.2007 passed by the Civil Court in Special Civil Suit No.<br \/>\n\t61\/94, whereby the suit has been dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tshort facts of the case appear to be that the factory of the<br \/>\n\tappellant-plaintiff located at Plot No.28 of Survey No.275\/76 at<br \/>\n\tvillage Shapar-Veraval was insured with the respondent Insurance<br \/>\n\tCompany.  As per the plaintiff, on 17.06.1993, at about 12.00 at<br \/>\n\tnight, there was fire burst in the factory and the plaintiff<br \/>\n\tsustained damages of Rs.7,48,750\/- plus Rs.5,04,220\/-, the<br \/>\n\tadditional damage was caused to the plaintiff. As the insurance<br \/>\n\tcompany did not pay the amount, the Suit was filed by the plaintiff<br \/>\n\tbeing Special Civil Suit No.61\/94. The respondent insurance company<br \/>\n\tresisted the suit contending inter alia that it had appointed<br \/>\n\tMr.V.Trivedi &amp; Co. to assess the loss and damage and as per the<br \/>\n\treport of the said Surveyor and the finding given by him, the fire<br \/>\n\twas not accidental.  The defendant-insurance Company contended that<br \/>\n\tas the fire was not accidental and the loss had not occurred due to<br \/>\n\taccidental genuine short circuit fire, the risk was not covered and<br \/>\n\ttherefore, the insurance company was not liable to pay the amount.<br \/>\n\tThe Civil Court had framed the issue inter alia as to whether the<br \/>\n\tground of repudiation of the liability by the Insurance Company was<br \/>\n\tgenuine or whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the amount<br \/>\n\tof damage from the defendant.  The evidence was led by both the<br \/>\n\tparties and ultimately, the Trial Court dismissed the suit by the<br \/>\n\tabove referred judgement.  It is under these circumstances, the<br \/>\n\tpresent appeal before this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>We<br \/>\n\thave considered the evidence, which has been made available by the<br \/>\n\tlearned advocate for the appellant at the time of hearing of the<br \/>\n\tmatter.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tlearned counsel appearing for the appellant first contended that the<br \/>\n\tfinding recorded by the lower Court that the fire was artificial and<br \/>\n\tnot accidental is not correct and in his submission, the Surveyor of<br \/>\n\tthe Insurance Company had only to opine that what quantum of damage<br \/>\n\tis sustained and could not have opined on the ground of genuineness<br \/>\n\tof the fire or otherwise.  He submitted that after the fire,<br \/>\n\treporting was made to the fire brigade of Rajkot Municipal<br \/>\n\tCorporation and as per the report of the Chief Fire Officer of<br \/>\n\tRajkot Municipal Corporation, the cause of fire was electric short<br \/>\n\tcircuit, therefore, he submitted that when there was already a<br \/>\n\treport of the fire brigade officer, the learned judge could not have<br \/>\n\trelied upon the opinion of the surveyor Shri Trivedi on the ground<br \/>\n\tof genuineness of the fire or otherwise.  He  therefore submitted<br \/>\n\tthat the error has been committed by the Trial Court which deserves<br \/>\n\tto be interfered with.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\texamination of the said contention shows that from the very<br \/>\n\tbeginning, in the written statement, the contention was raised by<br \/>\n\tthe Insurance Company that it was a man made fire and a calculated<br \/>\n\tmove to extract money from the defendant Insurance Company. In<br \/>\n\tfurtherance to the said averment in the written statement, the<br \/>\n\treport of Shri V. Trivedi &amp; Company, independent Surveyor was<br \/>\n\trelied upon.  Therefore, from the very beginning, repudiation of the<br \/>\n\tliability was on the ground that it was not genuine accidental fire,<br \/>\n\tbut was a man made artificial fire  and a calculated move to extract<br \/>\n\tmoney from the insurance company. Therefore, in such circumstances,<br \/>\n\tthe burden was upon the appellant-plaintiff to prove by examination<br \/>\n\tof any expert to show the Court that fire was not an artificial and<br \/>\n\twas genuinely accidental fire.  It is an admitted position that on<br \/>\n\tthe aspects of genuineness of the fire, or that fire was not<br \/>\n\tartificial one, no evidence of any expert has been produced by the<br \/>\n\tplaintiff.  The report of the fire brigade, upon which reliance has<br \/>\n\tbeen placed refers to the electric short circuit and it does not<br \/>\n\tspeak that such electric short circuit was an accidental one or<br \/>\n\totherwise.  The ground for repudiation of the liability of the<br \/>\n\tliability by the insurance company was that the fire was not<br \/>\n\taccidental, but was self created fire or a man made fire. Therefore,<br \/>\n\tit was for the plaintiff to prove by satisfactory evidence that<br \/>\n\tthere was sufficient circumstances leading to the conclusion that<br \/>\n\tthe fire was accidental fire and not main made or artificial. As<br \/>\n\tagainst the same, the Insurance Company has led evidence of Shri<br \/>\n\tTrivedi at Exh.116. In the examination-in-chief, he has stated four<br \/>\n\treasons for supporting his conclusion as to why the fire was not an<br \/>\n\taccidental one.  Such reasons are narrated as ABCD in the<br \/>\n\texamination in chief by way of an affidavit.  Nothing contrary has<br \/>\n\tcome out in the cross-examination except to the extent that he had<br \/>\n\tno material for such purpose.  But the pertinent aspect is that in<br \/>\n\tthe grounds stated in his deposition by Shri Trivedi who was<br \/>\n\tconsidered as an expert by the Insurance Company, first was that<br \/>\n\tthere was no raw material in the premises which may lead to<br \/>\n\taccidental fie.  Second ground stated was that the firewood was at a<br \/>\n\tdifferent place and the places at which the electric line was<br \/>\n\tpassing did not contain any material which can be said inflammable.<br \/>\n\tThe third ground stated by him is that the firewood was at distance<br \/>\n\tin the open ground and when it was required, the same was being<br \/>\n\tcarried to the boiler.  The fourth ground was that in the<br \/>\n\tmanufacturing process, there is no use of petrol,  diesel, kerosene<br \/>\n\tor gas or any inflammable material which may lead to the accidental<br \/>\n\tfire.  The fifth ground was that the electric switch was in the same<br \/>\n\tcondition and there was no fire at that place.  Therefore, he has<br \/>\n\topined that the fire was a self created one and it was not<br \/>\n\taccidental. Further circumstance, which has been considered by the<br \/>\n\tlearned Judge is that if there was accidental genuine fire due to<br \/>\n\telectric short circuit, first there will be defusing of all the fuse<br \/>\n\tand the wires will also get burnt.  No such circumstance had come on<br \/>\n\trecord and on the contrary, there was neither any defusing nor any<br \/>\n\tdamage to the electric wires.  Under these circumstances, when the<br \/>\n\tplaintiff had not led any evidence of any expert and the Insurance<br \/>\n\tCompany led evidence to show that the fire was not accidental, the<br \/>\n\tfinding record by the learned Judge cannot be said to be erroneous.\n<\/p>\n<p>It<br \/>\n\twas next contended by Mr.Rao, learned counsel appearing for the<br \/>\n\tappellant that the document of correspondence between the Insurance<br \/>\n\tCompany and Shri Trivedi, Surveyor, were there on record at Exhibits<br \/>\n\t121 and 122 and in his submission, as per the said correspondence,<br \/>\n\tthe surveyor Shri Trivedi had admitted that he had no material to<br \/>\n\tshow that the fire was not accidental, therefore, the learned judge<br \/>\n\tought not to have given the finding that the fire was not genuine<br \/>\n\tbut artificial.\n<\/p>\n<p>As<br \/>\n\tsuch, the fire was accidental or genuine can be considered on the<br \/>\n\tbasis of various circumstantial evidence which existed at the time<br \/>\n\twhen the surveyor visited the premises. The learned Judge in the<br \/>\n\tdiscussion at paras 21 and 22 elaborately has considered the said<br \/>\n\taspects. If the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the fire<br \/>\n\twas not accidental, the same cannot be faulted with merely because<br \/>\n\tin the correspondence between the surveyor and the insurance<br \/>\n\tcompany, it was stated that there was no material.  As such, the<br \/>\n\treport of the surveyor has been fully accepted by the insurance<br \/>\n\tcompany and was pressed in service by the Insurance Company.\n<\/p>\n<p>Be<br \/>\n\tit noted that the plaintiff had filed the Suit and the burden was<br \/>\n\tupon the plaintiff to prove that the fire was accidental,  more<br \/>\n\tparticularly when the defence was that the fire was not accidental<br \/>\n\tand the liability was repudiated. If the plaintiff has failed to<br \/>\n\tdischarge the burden, as against the same, the Insurance Company has<br \/>\n\tproved the said factum, it cannot be said that the error has been<br \/>\n\tcommitted by the learned Judge in finding that the fire was not<br \/>\n\taccidental and the ground for repudiation of the liability by the<br \/>\n\tInsurance company is not legal.\n<\/p>\n<p>No<br \/>\n\tother contention is raised.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tview of the above, the appeal is meritless, therefore dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p> (JAYANT<br \/>\nPATEL, J.)<\/p>\n<p> (BANKIM<br \/>\nN. MEHTA, J.)<\/p>\n<p>*bjoy<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Hindustan vs United on 26 August, 2010 Author: Jayant Patel,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Bankim.N.Mehta,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print FA\/1876\/2010 7\/ 7 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 1876 of 2010 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of [&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":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-231022","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Hindustan vs United on 26 August, 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\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Hindustan vs United on 26 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-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=\"2010-08-25T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-02T14:24:00+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Hindustan vs United on 26 August, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-02T14:24:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1415,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010\",\"name\":\"Hindustan vs United on 26 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-02T14:24:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Hindustan vs United on 26 August, 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:\/\/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":"Hindustan vs United on 26 August, 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\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Hindustan vs United on 26 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-08-25T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-02T14:24:00+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Hindustan vs United on 26 August, 2010","datePublished":"2010-08-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-02T14:24:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010"},"wordCount":1415,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010","name":"Hindustan vs United on 26 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-08-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-02T14:24:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hindustan-vs-united-on-26-august-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Hindustan vs United on 26 August, 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:\/\/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\/231022","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=231022"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/231022\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=231022"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=231022"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=231022"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}