{"id":231601,"date":"2010-07-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-07-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010"},"modified":"2018-04-19T17:07:23","modified_gmt":"2018-04-19T11:37:23","slug":"renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010","title":{"rendered":"Renu Devi vs Kusum Devi &Amp; Ors on 13 July, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Patna High Court – Orders<\/div>\n
Renu Devi vs Kusum Devi &Amp; Ors on 13 July, 2010<\/div>\n
     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA\n\n                   LPA No.352 of 2010\n\nRENU DEVI W\/O NAVIN SINGH R\/O VILL.- NIMA, P.O.\nSHYAM NAGAR NIMA, P.S. AMAS, DISTT.- GAYA\n                         ...RESPONDENT - APPELLANT\n\n                 VERSUS\n\n1. KUSUM DEVI W\/O MATHURA PRASAD RAVIDAS R\/O\nVILL.- AKAUNA, P.O. SHERGHATI, P.S. AMAS, DISTT.- GAYA\n2. ZUBAIDA KHATOON W\/O MUNSHI NAYEEMUDDIN R\/O\nVILL.- BAIDA, P.O. SHERGHATI, P.S. AMAS, DISTT.- GAYA\n3. DURGAWATI SINGH W\/O SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH R\/O\nVILL.- NIMA, P.O. SHYAM NAGAR NIMA, P.S. AMAS, DISTT.-\nGAYA\n4. NAZRINA KHATOON W\/O AFROZ KHAN R\/O VILL.-\nSUPAIL, P.O. SHYAM NAGAR NIMA, P.S. AMAS, DISTT.-\nGAYA\n5. PUNAM DEVI W\/O ASHOK KUMAR SINGH R\/O VILL.-\nNIMA, P.O. SHYAM NAGAR NIMA, P.S. AMAS, DISTT.- GAYA\n6. BABITA DEVI W\/O LAXMAN MANJHI R\/O VILL.- SUPAIL,\nP.O. SHYAM NAGAR NIMA, P.S. AMAS, DISTT.- GAYA\n7. MADHURI DEVI W\/O ARUN KUMAR MAURYA R\/O VILL.-\nAKAUNA, P.O. SHERGHATI, P.S. AMAS, DISTT.- GAYA\n8. SHAHNAZ KHATOON W\/O NEYAZ AHMAD KHAN R\/O\nVILL.- SUPAI, P.O. SHYAM NAGAR NIMA, P.S. AMAS, DISTT.-\nGAYA\n9. SHAHNAZ BANO W\/O MD. KHALIQUR RAHMAN R\/O\nVILL.- BAIDA, P.O. SHERGHATI, P.S. AMAS, DISTT.- GAYA\n10. SHANTI DEVI W\/O RAJESHWAR SINGH R\/O VILL.- NIMA,\nP.O. SHYAM NAGAR NIMA, P.S. AMAS, DISTT.- GAYA\n11. SHOBHA DEVI W\/O SHARVAN KUMAR R\/O VILL.-\nAKAUNA, P.O. SHERGHATI, P.S. AMAS, DISTT.- GAYA\n12. SALMA KHATOON W\/O MD. IRSHAD ANSARI R\/O VILL.-\nAKAUNA, P.O. SHERGHATI, P.S. AMAS, DISTT.- GAYA\n13. SUFI KHATOON W\/O KHAIRUDDIN AHMAD R\/O VILL.-\nKURMATHU, P.O. SHYAM NAGAR NIMA, P.S. AMAS, DISTT.-\nGAYA\n14. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH PRINCIPAL\nSECRETARY PANCHAYATI RAJ GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA\n                         ... RESPONDENTS- RESPONDENTS\n                                           2\n\n\n\n\n       15. SABINA KHATOON W\/O BADRUDDIN AHMAD R\/O VILL.-\n       KURMATHU, P.S. AMAS, DISTT.- GAYA\n                        ..... WRIT PETITIONER- RESPONDENT\n\n                            -----------\n<\/pre>\n
       FOR THE APPELLANT  : M\/s Rajendra Pd. Singh, Sr Advocate
\n                             Rajeev Kr. Singh, Nand Kishore Singh
\n                             Rakesh Kr. Singh, Advocates
\n       FOR THE RESPONDENT : Mr S.B.K. Mangalam, Advocate\n<\/p>\n
                             ———-\n<\/p>\n
                                   PRESENT<\/p>\n
                    THE HON\u201fBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
\n                    THE HON\u201fBLE MR JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH<\/p>\n
Shiva Kirti Singh, J.     This appeal under clause 10 of the Letters Patent<\/p>\n
       of this Court has been preferred against the judgment and order of the<\/p>\n
       learned single Judge dated 3.2.2010 whereby writ petition bearing<\/p>\n
       CWJC No.2159 of 2009 has been allowed by setting aside judgment<\/p>\n
       of learned Additional Munsif, Sherghati, Gaya – cum- Election<\/p>\n
       Tribunal in Election Petition No.01 of 2006\/ 01 of 2007 with a further<\/p>\n
       direction that the learned Tribunal will rehear the arguments and<\/p>\n
       proceed in accordance with law to deliver judgment.<\/p>\n
       2.           Appellant is the successful candidate in the election held<\/p>\n
       on 2.6.2006 for Gramp Panchayat Akauna ,Block Amas, District<\/p>\n
       Gaya. Her margin of victory over the writ petitioner was of four votes.<\/p>\n
       3.           According to the case of the writ petitioner \/ election<\/p>\n
       petitioner, the counting of votes which began on 18.6.2006 was
\n                                       3<\/span><\/p>\n
completed at about 2.30 a.m. of 19.6.2006 and it was announced that<\/p>\n
the election petitioner had secured 651 votes against 634 by the<\/p>\n
appellant and had thus won the election by a margin of 17 votes. It is<\/p>\n
her further case that the Returning Officer, the Anchal Adhikari of<\/p>\n
Sherghati block on account of being tired, decided to prepare Form 21<\/p>\n
and 22 and issue the certificate etc. at 10.00 a.m. on 19.6.2006 but<\/p>\n
when the election petitioner reached the counting station at 9.30 a.m.,<\/p>\n
she was surprised to find that Form 21 and 22 had been prepared and<\/p>\n
issued in favour of the appellant and by manipulation in preparing<\/p>\n
Form 20 the writ petitioner was shown to have secured 620 votes only<\/p>\n
against 624 votes by the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
4.           Admittedly, the writ petitioner did not or could not file<\/p>\n
any application for recount of votes before the Returning Officer as<\/p>\n
required by Rule 79 of the Bihar Panchayat Election Rules 2006<\/p>\n
(hereinafter referred to as \u201ethe Rues\u201f) nor any further explanation was<\/p>\n
pleaded in the election petition for not filing such a petition for<\/p>\n
recounting of votes.\n<\/p>\n
5.           The stand of the appellant in her written statement was<\/p>\n
that the counting of votes began at SMS College, Sherghati and<\/p>\n
continued without any break till declaration of results on 19.6.2006<\/p>\n
and no results either official or unofficial was announced by any<\/p>\n
official before completing final scrutiny under Instruction No.18 of<\/p>\n
Chapter II of Book of Instructions issued by the State Election
\n                                      4<\/span><\/p>\n
Commission, Bihar. It was only after scrutiny of ballot papers that the<\/p>\n
result was declared in favour of the appellant who was granted<\/p>\n
certificate as per law.\n<\/p>\n
6.           The deposition of the Returning Officer annexed as<\/p>\n
Annexure-5 to the writ petition discloses that he has categorically<\/p>\n
stated that counting of votes continued without any break till<\/p>\n
afternoon of 19.6.2006 and only thereafter the results were declared<\/p>\n
and before that results had not been declared officially any time. He<\/p>\n
has further deposed that during the counting of votes nobody raised<\/p>\n
any objection and on scrutiny by him it had been ascertained that the<\/p>\n
appellant had secured majority votes and hence, she was declared<\/p>\n
elected as per law.       He has also deposed that scrutiny was done in<\/p>\n
presence of observers. He has categorically denied the claim of the<\/p>\n
writ petitioner\/ election petitioner that he had asked her to collect<\/p>\n
certificate in the morning. He has also denied that Form 21 and 22<\/p>\n
were prepared behind the back of any candidate or agent.<\/p>\n
7.           From the judgment and order of the Election Tribunal<\/p>\n
dated 16.12.2008 contained in Annexure-6 to the writ petition, it is<\/p>\n
found that he has considered all the relevant facts as well as several<\/p>\n
judgments of the Apex Court and this Court and found that the<\/p>\n
election petitioner had not filed application under Rule 79 of the Rules<\/p>\n
and had failed to make out any case for recounting. The issue of<\/p>\n
corrupt practice was also decided against the writ petitioner \/ election
\n                                        5<\/span><\/p>\n
petitioner on the basis of evidence and other cogent materials.<\/p>\n
Accordingly, the election petition was dismissed on contest.<\/p>\n
8.              From the order under appeal it has been shown that the<\/p>\n
learned single Judge has not found any error in the approach of the<\/p>\n
Election Tribunal either on facts or on law but has concluded at the<\/p>\n
very beginning of the order as follows : –\n<\/p>\n
                “Both the learned counsels agreed that the Trial
\n             Court has found that after votes were counted, the
\n             Returning Officer carried out a recheck of votes
\n             when parties were not present. He accordingly
\n             corrected From 20 and later declared result on that
\n             basis. Election petition has been dismissed on the
\n             sole ground that as required by Rule 79 of the
\n             Bihar Panchayat Election Rule 2006, petitioner had
\n             not given any application for recount and not
\n             having done so, his prayer for recount in the
\n             election petition could not be entertained. In my
\n             view the judgment can not be sustained.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     9.         So far as scope and effect of Rule 79 of the Rules is<\/p>\n
     concerned, by now the law is well settled by catena of judgments<\/p>\n
     that normally for success before the Election Tribunal on the plea of<\/p>\n
     recounting of votes, an election petitioner must show that<\/p>\n
     opportunity was availed and required application under Rule 79 of<\/p>\n
     the Rules was filed before the Returning Officer at the appropriate<\/p>\n
     time. It is also settled law that non- filing of such application can be<\/p>\n
     explained on the basis of specific pleadings to the effect that the<\/p>\n
     situation or the circumstances were difficult and chaotic or that for<\/p>\n
     any such good reason such application could not have been filed
\n                                   6<\/span><\/p>\n
 before the Returning Officer.     When such explanation is found<\/p>\n
 convincing, non filing of application under Rule 79 can be ignored<\/p>\n
 and if a case is made out on evidence, order can be passed by the<\/p>\n
 Election Tribunal for recounting of votes in part or whole as per<\/p>\n
 case made out.\n<\/p>\n
10.         In the present case, the explanation for non- compliance<\/p>\n
with Rule 79 is not based upon any finding of fact by the Election<\/p>\n
Tribunal or arrived at by the Writ Court but only because both the<\/p>\n
counsels agreed that after counting of votes, scrutiny was carried out<\/p>\n
when parties were not present. In the appeal, a strong protest has been<\/p>\n
raised that no such agreement was expressed by learned counsel for<\/p>\n
the appellant. It has been further submitted that when parties had<\/p>\n
filed their pleadings as claim and counter claim before the Election<\/p>\n
Tribunal and had led evidence on the disputed facts and issues, it was<\/p>\n
not proper to decide such an important issue on the basis of an alleged<\/p>\n
verbal agreement of counsel for the appellant before the Writ Court<\/p>\n
that recheck or scrutiny was made when parties were not present.<\/p>\n
11.         When an election dispute has been decided after contest<\/p>\n
on the basis of averments of the parties and evidence adduced by<\/p>\n
them, in our considered view, it would not be prudent to interfere<\/p>\n
with findings in such a judgment of the Election Tribunal only on<\/p>\n
verbal submissions of one of the counsels. Verbal submissions on<\/p>\n
such vital issue may suffer from several defects and infirmities
\n                                    7<\/span><\/p>\n
including non- preparedness on the part of the counsel, lack of<\/p>\n
communication skills on his part or misunderstanding the<\/p>\n
communication. Clearly, it would be highly unjust and unfair to the<\/p>\n
concerned party to ignore her pleadings and evidence and decide an<\/p>\n
important issue after the same has been decided by the original court,<\/p>\n
merely on verbal stand of his counsel.\n<\/p>\n
12.         It is found that it was on such verbal admission by the<\/p>\n
counsel of the appellant before the Writ Court that the judgment of<\/p>\n
the Election Tribunal was set aside after giving a finding that the<\/p>\n
prayer of recount had been incorrectly decided on the basis of<\/p>\n
absence of application under Rule 79 of the Rules.<\/p>\n
13.         I am of the considered view that the finding of the<\/p>\n
learned Election Tribunal on the issue of recount could be reversed<\/p>\n
only on the basis of pleadings and evidence and not merely on the<\/p>\n
basis of verbal concession of counsels for the parties.            Such<\/p>\n
concession, in the facts of the case, could not be a legal and sufficient<\/p>\n
material to neutralize the pleadings and evidence available on record<\/p>\n
before the Election Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n
14.         Learned counsel for the writ petitioner submitted that in<\/p>\n
view of pleadings and evidence of the writ petitioner before the<\/p>\n
Election Tribunal it must be held that sufficient explanation was<\/p>\n
made out for not filing the application for recounting of votes<\/p>\n
required by Rule 79 of the Rules. We have examined the pleadings
\n                                             8<\/span><\/p>\n
        and other materials on that basis but we are not in a position to take a<\/p>\n
        different view from that of the Election Tribunal that no case has<\/p>\n
        been made out for recount of votes. The matter could have been<\/p>\n
        different if the case made out by the writ petitioner that scrutiny was<\/p>\n
        done behind her back after declaration of result had been accepted by<\/p>\n
        the appellant in her pleadings and evidence or if there had been a<\/p>\n
        finding on evidence that the writ petitioner had succeeded in<\/p>\n
        establishing her claim. But that is not the situation here. Hence, there<\/p>\n
        is no option but to interfere with the judgment of the Writ Court. As<\/p>\n
        a result, the same is set aside and the writ petition is dismissed.<\/p>\n
        15.          This appeal stands allowed but without any order as to<\/p>\n
        costs.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n                                                      (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)\n\n\n\nR. M. Doshit, CJ       I agree.\n\n\n\n\n                                                       (R. M. Doshit, CJ)\n\n\n\n        The 13th July, 2010\n        NAFR\n        S.Kumar\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Patna High Court – Orders Renu Devi vs Kusum Devi &Amp; Ors on 13 July, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.352 of 2010 RENU DEVI W\/O NAVIN SINGH R\/O VILL.- NIMA, P.O. SHYAM NAGAR NIMA, P.S. AMAS, DISTT.- GAYA …RESPONDENT – APPELLANT VERSUS 1. KUSUM DEVI W\/O MATHURA PRASAD RAVIDAS […]<\/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":[8,27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-231601","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-patna-high-court-orders"],"yoast_head":"\nRenu Devi vs Kusum Devi &Amp; Ors on 13 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Renu Devi vs Kusum Devi &Amp; Ors on 13 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-07-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-04-19T11:37:23+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Renu Devi vs Kusum Devi &Amp; Ors on 13 July, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-19T11:37:23+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1580,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Patna High Court - Orders\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010\",\"name\":\"Renu Devi vs Kusum Devi &Amp; Ors on 13 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-19T11:37:23+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Renu Devi vs Kusum Devi &Amp; Ors on 13 July, 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":"Renu Devi vs Kusum Devi &Amp; Ors on 13 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Renu Devi vs Kusum Devi &Amp; Ors on 13 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-07-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-04-19T11:37:23+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Renu Devi vs Kusum Devi &Amp; Ors on 13 July, 2010","datePublished":"2010-07-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-19T11:37:23+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010"},"wordCount":1580,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Patna High Court - Orders"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010","name":"Renu Devi vs Kusum Devi &Amp; Ors on 13 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-07-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-19T11:37:23+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/renu-devi-vs-kusum-devi-amp-ors-on-13-july-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Renu Devi vs Kusum Devi &Amp; Ors on 13 July, 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\/231601","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=231601"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/231601\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=231601"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=231601"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=231601"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}