{"id":232722,"date":"2008-11-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008"},"modified":"2015-11-08T14:11:25","modified_gmt":"2015-11-08T08:41:25","slug":"ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"M\/S. C.D.Baby And Company vs State Of Kerala on 13 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
M\/S. C.D.Baby And Company vs State Of Kerala on 13 November, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nST.Rev..No. 116 of 2004()\n\n\n1. M\/S. C.D.BABY AND COMPANY,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :DR.K.B.MUHAMED KUTTY (SR.)\n\n                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER\n\nThe Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER\n\n Dated :13\/11\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
                 H.L. DATTU, C.J. & A.K. BASHEER, J.\n<\/p>\n
             – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –\n<\/p>\n
                             S.T. Rev. No. 116 of 2004\n<\/p>\n
             – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –\n<\/p>\n
                  Dated this the 13th day of November, 2008
\n                                            Order
\nH.L. Dattu, C. J:\n<\/p>\n
       Petitioner is an assessee under the provisions of Kerala General Sales<\/p>\n
Tax Act (the Act, for short).          He is a dealer in rice and other commodities.<\/p>\n
According to him, he is the second seller of all the items dealt with by him<\/p>\n
and therefore is not liable to pay tax.\n<\/p>\n
       2. The assessment year in question is 1995-96.<\/p>\n
        3. The assessee had filed his annual returns before the assessing<\/p>\n
authority and in that had conceded taxable turnover at Rs.29,84,310\/- and<\/p>\n
the tax payable as nil.\n<\/p>\n
        4.   The business premises of the asessee was inspected by the<\/p>\n
Intelligence    Squad on 19\/12\/1995 and on such inspection they have<\/p>\n
recorded stock variations in various items.\n<\/p>\n
        5. Basing on the shop inspection report, the assessing authority,<\/p>\n
after verifying the books of accounts, had issued a pre-assessment notice<\/p>\n
proposing to reject the books of accounts and to proceed with the best<\/p>\n
judgment assessment for the assessment year in question. In the proposal<\/p>\n
made, the assessing authority had informed the petitioner the following<\/p>\n
defects:\n<\/p>\n
 ST.Rev.116\/2004                     2<\/span><\/p>\n
       (i) The shop inspection report revealed stock variation in 28 items.<\/p>\n
       (ii) Verification of recovered business slips revealed that sales of<\/p>\n
provisions and stationery articles valued at Rs.14562.40 were not billed.<\/p>\n
       (iii) Sales tax due on the sales turnover of 103.5 Kg. Lobba had not<\/p>\n
been accounted.\n<\/p>\n
       (iv) Penalty of Rs.79,558\/-, being double the amount of tax sought<\/p>\n
to be evaded      on a   turnover of Rs.8,19,930\/- was imposed         by the<\/p>\n
Intelligence Officer under Section 45A of the act.<\/p>\n
       6. The assessee, after receipt of the re-assessment notice, had filed<\/p>\n
his objections.\n<\/p>\n
       7. The assessing authority, after considering the objections so filed,<\/p>\n
and based on the shop inspection report and the penalty imposed by the<\/p>\n
authority under section 45A of the Act, has concluded the assessment and in<\/p>\n
that has made an addition of 7 times of the suppressions detected to the<\/p>\n
conceded turnover.\n<\/p>\n
       8. The order so passed by the assessing authority was the subject<\/p>\n
matter of the appeal before the first appellate authority in STA.No.1637 of<\/p>\n
1998.    The first appellate authority by its order dated 30\/9\/1999 being of<\/p>\n
 ST.Rev.116\/2004                   3<\/span><\/p>\n
the opinion that the additions so made by the assessing authority is<\/p>\n
excessive\/on the higher side has reduced the same to 4 = times of the<\/p>\n
suppression detected. The assessee was not satisfied with the order so<\/p>\n
passed by the first appellate authority and therefore had filed an appeal<\/p>\n
before the Tribunal. The Tribunal while concurring with the omissions<\/p>\n
pointed out by the assessing authority as well as the appellate authority, and<\/p>\n
further being of the opinion that the additions made towards the probable<\/p>\n
omissions and suppressions is again on the higher side,      has reduced the<\/p>\n
addition from 4 = times to 3 times. It is the correctness or otherwise of<\/p>\n
the orders passed by the Kerala State Appellate Tribunal in TA.No.644 of<\/p>\n
1999 dated 31st of May 2003 that is called in question by the assessee in<\/p>\n
this Tax Revision Case.\n<\/p>\n
      9. The Assessee has framed the following questions of law for our<\/p>\n
consideration and decision. They are as under:<\/p>\n
            “(i) Whether on the facts and in the<\/p>\n
            circumstances of the case and especially the<\/p>\n
            petitioner being a second seller not liable to<\/p>\n
            pay tax, and the stock variation alleged is<\/p>\n
            incorrect, is not the entire addition to the<\/p>\n
            conceded         turnover         (exempted)<\/p>\n
            unwarranted?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
 ST.Rev.116\/2004                      4<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                  (ii) Whether on the facts and in view of<\/p>\n
            the fact that the inspection was during the<\/p>\n
            middle of December and there is no proof<\/p>\n
            that suppression continued after inspection, is<\/p>\n
            not the addition sustained by the Appellate<\/p>\n
            Tribunal excessive?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       10. So far as the first question is concerned, the assessing authority in<\/p>\n
the pre- passessment notice has indicated that the claim of the petitioner that<\/p>\n
he is the second seller of all the commodities cannot be accepted, in view of<\/p>\n
the shop inspection report. The finding of the assessing authority is based<\/p>\n
on the shop inspection report and therefore the assessee cannot claim that<\/p>\n
he is a second seller of all the commodities in his business premises.<\/p>\n
Therefore the first question of law framed by the assessee requires to be<\/p>\n
answered against the assessee.\n<\/p>\n
       11. So far as the second question of law is concerned, it is necessary<\/p>\n
to notice the date of shop inspection that was conducted by the Intelligence<\/p>\n
Squad . The inspection was conducted on 19\/12\/1995. The assessment year<\/p>\n
in question is 1995-96, commencing from 01\/04\/1995 to 31\/3\/1996. It is<\/p>\n
not at the fag end of the year that the shop inspection was conducted by the<\/p>\n
Intelligence Squad and therefore the assessing authority may be justified in<\/p>\n
his opinion that if there was no shop inspection, the assessee would not<\/p>\n
 ST.Rev.116\/2004                    5<\/span><\/p>\n
have disclosed the sales turnover in his annual returns. Therefore the<\/p>\n
additions made by the assessing authority depending on the shop inspection<\/p>\n
dated 19\/12\/1995 can be made use of by the assessing authority for making<\/p>\n
certain additions to the conceded turnover. Therefore the second question<\/p>\n
of law framed by the assessee also requires to be answered against the<\/p>\n
assessee and in favour of the Revenue.\n<\/p>\n
      12. Accordingly, we do not see any merit in the Revision Petition<\/p>\n
filed by the assessee. Therefore we reject this revision petition.<\/p>\n
      Ordered accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                                      H.L. DATTU
\n                                                      Chief Justice<\/p>\n
                                                     A.K. BASHEER
\n                                                         Judge<\/p>\n
an.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court M\/S. C.D.Baby And Company vs State Of Kerala on 13 November, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM ST.Rev..No. 116 of 2004() 1. M\/S. C.D.BABY AND COMPANY, … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE … Respondent For Petitioner :DR.K.B.MUHAMED KUTTY (SR.) For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER The Hon’ble […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-232722","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nM\/S. C.D.Baby And Company vs State Of Kerala on 13 November, 2008 - 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\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S. C.D.Baby And Company vs State Of Kerala on 13 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-11-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-11-08T08:41:25+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\\\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S. C.D.Baby And Company vs State Of Kerala on 13 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-08T08:41:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":988,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S. C.D.Baby And Company vs State Of Kerala on 13 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-08T08:41:25+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S. C.D.Baby And Company vs State Of Kerala on 13 November, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"M\/S. C.D.Baby And Company vs State Of Kerala on 13 November, 2008 - 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\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S. C.D.Baby And Company vs State Of Kerala on 13 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-11-08T08:41:25+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\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S. C.D.Baby And Company vs State Of Kerala on 13 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-08T08:41:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008"},"wordCount":988,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008","name":"M\/S. C.D.Baby And Company vs State Of Kerala on 13 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-08T08:41:25+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-c-d-baby-and-company-vs-state-of-kerala-on-13-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S. C.D.Baby And Company vs State Of Kerala on 13 November, 2008"}]},{"@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\/232722","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=232722"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/232722\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=232722"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=232722"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=232722"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}