{"id":235651,"date":"2009-06-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-06-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009"},"modified":"2014-02-05T12:40:23","modified_gmt":"2014-02-05T07:10:23","slug":"the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009","title":{"rendered":"The Managing Director vs Jayakumar on 10 June, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
The Managing Director vs Jayakumar on 10 June, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nMACA.No. 692 of 2004()\n\n\n1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. JAYAKUMAR, S\/O.NESAYYAN,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. KUNJAPPI, CHARAS VEEDU, KOLLALCHARAL\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.SUBHASH CYRIAC\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.BLAZE K.JOSE\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS\n\n Dated :10\/06\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                          K. M. JOSEPH &\n                 M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.\n              - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                    M.A.C.A.No. 692 of 2004\n              - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n              Dated this the 10th day of June, 2009\n\n                             JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
Joseph Francis, J.\n<\/p>\n
      This appeal is filed by the second respondent in O.P.(M.V.)<\/p>\n
No. 1287 of 2000, on the file of the M.A.C.T., Neyyattinkara.<\/p>\n
The first respondent is the petitioner and the second respondent is<\/p>\n
the first respondent in that Original Petition. That is a petition<\/p>\n
filed under Section 166 of the M.V. Act.\n<\/p>\n
      2. The allegation is that on 28.2.2000, while the petitioner<\/p>\n
was riding his motor cycle with his wife as pillion rider from<\/p>\n
Parassala to Cheruvarakonam from north to south, a Tamil Nadu<\/p>\n
bus bearing No.TN 74 N-0252, belonging to the second<\/p>\n
respondent and driven by the first respondent in the O.P. in a<\/p>\n
rash and negligent manner came from the opposite direction and<\/p>\n
hit against the motor cycle, as a result of which the petitioner and<\/p>\n
M.A.C.A.No. 692 of 2004
\n                                   2<\/span><\/p>\n
his wife fell down and sustained injuries. The accident took place due<\/p>\n
to the rash and negligent driving of the first respondent.          The<\/p>\n
petitioner claims Rs. 3 Lakhs as compensation.        The wife of the<\/p>\n
petitioner filed O.P.(M.V.) 1293 of 2000 claiming Rs. 1 Lakh as<\/p>\n
compensation.\n<\/p>\n
      3. The respondents filed written statement contending that the<\/p>\n
accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of the petitioner and<\/p>\n
that the compensation claimed is excessive.         Before the Claims<\/p>\n
Tribunal, PWs. 1 and 2 and RW1 were examined. Exts.A1 to A20<\/p>\n
were marked.       The learned Claims Tribunal, on considering the<\/p>\n
evidence, allowed O.P. (M.V.) No.1287 of 2000 and an award was<\/p>\n
passed allowing the petitioner to realise a sum of Rs.90,540\/- with<\/p>\n
interest at the rate of 9% from the date of the application till date of<\/p>\n
realisation from respondents 1 and 2 in the O.P. Against that award<\/p>\n
the second respondent in the O.P. filed this appeal.<\/p>\n
      4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned<\/p>\n
counsel for the first respondent.\n<\/p>\n
M.A.C.A.No. 692 of 2004
\n                                    3<\/span><\/p>\n
      5. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that the accident<\/p>\n
was due to the rash and negligent driving of the petitioner, who was<\/p>\n
riding the motor cycle and that the compensation awarded               is<\/p>\n
excessive. In connection with the accident the police registered a case<\/p>\n
against the first respondent in the O.P. as Crime No. 68 of 2000 for the<\/p>\n
offences punishable under Sections 279 and 337 I.P.C. Ext.A5 is the<\/p>\n
copy of the charge sheet. The petitioner and his wife were examined as<\/p>\n
PWs. 1 and 2. They gave evidence to the effect that the accident<\/p>\n
occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus by the first<\/p>\n
respondent. Eventhough the first respondent was examined as RW1 to<\/p>\n
prove that he was not negligent, his version cannot be accepted in the<\/p>\n
absence of any independent evidence. Since the testimony of PWs. 1<\/p>\n
and 2 is supported by Ext.A5 charge sheet, we are of the view that the<\/p>\n
learned Claims Tribunal is justified in finding that the accident was due<\/p>\n
to the rash and negligent driving of the bus by the first respondent in<\/p>\n
the O.P.\n<\/p>\n
M.A.C.A.No. 692 of 2004
\n                                   4<\/span><\/p>\n
      6.    As regards the quantum of compensation awarded, the<\/p>\n
learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Claims Tribunal<\/p>\n
went wrong in assessing the permanent disability of the petitioner as<\/p>\n
13% without any disability certificate. A copy of the wound certificate<\/p>\n
and other records    show that due to the       accident the petitioner<\/p>\n
sustained the following injuries.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            “Fracture (R) clavicle, fracture (R) zygoma,<\/p>\n
      fracture squamous part of temporary bone just posterior<\/p>\n
      to the (R) mastoid, numbness (R) little finger, swelling<\/p>\n
      (R) cheek, tenderness (R) zygomatic arch and post<\/p>\n
      immobilisation stiffness (R) shoulder. He was admitted<\/p>\n
      and treated in the Medical College hospital as inpatient<\/p>\n
      for the period from 28.2.2000 to 7.3.2000 and thereafter<\/p>\n
      in the Parassala Government Hospital for the period<\/p>\n
      from 9.3.2000 to 21.3.2000.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     7. Considering the nature of the injuries, Rs.12,500\/- awarded by<\/p>\n
the Tribunal towards compensation for pain and sufferings cannot be<\/p>\n
M.A.C.A.No. 692 of 2004
\n                                     5<\/span><\/p>\n
said to be exorbitant. PW1 swears that he was working as R.C.C.<\/p>\n
Fitter cum Electric Welder and was getting Rs.5,850\/- as monthly<\/p>\n
income. Considering the nature of the work done by the petitioner, the<\/p>\n
Tribunal assessed the monthly income as Rs.2,000\/-, which is also<\/p>\n
reasonable.   Rs.8,000\/- awarded as compensation towards loss of<\/p>\n
earnings for four months is also reasonable. Since the Tribunal is well<\/p>\n
experienced in dealing with motor accident claims cases, the disability<\/p>\n
of 13% assessed by the Tribunal based on medical records and on<\/p>\n
seeing the petitioner at the time of examination before him, we are of<\/p>\n
the view that the percentage of disability assessed by the Tribunal is<\/p>\n
not excessive. Ext.A6 is the wound certificate, which shows that the<\/p>\n
age of PW1 is 35 years. 17 is taken by the Tribunal as suitable<\/p>\n
multiplier. Calculating on that basis, the Tribunal awarded Rs.53,040\/-<\/p>\n
as compensation for permanent disability, which is also, according to<\/p>\n
us, not unreasonable. Rs.10,000\/- awarded towards compensation for<\/p>\n
loss of amenities in life is also not excessive, in our view. In the light<\/p>\n
M.A.C.A.No. 692 of 2004
\n                                    6<\/span><\/p>\n
of the above aspects of the matter, we are of the view that this appeal is<\/p>\n
without any merit and is liable to be dismissed.<\/p>\n
      8. This appeal is dismissed. The award passed in O.P. (M.V)<\/p>\n
No.1287 of 2000 on the file of the M.A.C.T., Neyyattinkara is<\/p>\n
confirmed. The parties are directed to suffer their respective cost in<\/p>\n
this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                         (K. M. JOSEPH)
\n                                                Judge<\/p>\n
                                      (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS)
\n                                                 Judge<\/p>\n
tm<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court The Managing Director vs Jayakumar on 10 June, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM MACA.No. 692 of 2004() 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, … Petitioner Vs 1. JAYAKUMAR, S\/O.NESAYYAN, … Respondent 2. KUNJAPPI, CHARAS VEEDU, KOLLALCHARAL For Petitioner :SRI.SUBHASH CYRIAC For Respondent :SRI.BLAZE K.JOSE The Hon’ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH The […]<\/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-235651","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Managing Director vs Jayakumar on 10 June, 2009 - 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\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Managing Director vs Jayakumar on 10 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-02-05T07:10:23+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=\"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\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Managing Director vs Jayakumar on 10 June, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-02-05T07:10:23+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009\"},\"wordCount\":928,\"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\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009\",\"name\":\"The Managing Director vs Jayakumar on 10 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-02-05T07:10:23+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Managing Director vs Jayakumar on 10 June, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"The Managing Director vs Jayakumar on 10 June, 2009 - 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\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Managing Director vs Jayakumar on 10 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-02-05T07:10:23+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Managing Director vs Jayakumar on 10 June, 2009","datePublished":"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-02-05T07:10:23+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009"},"wordCount":928,"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\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009","name":"The Managing Director vs Jayakumar on 10 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-06-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-02-05T07:10:23+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-managing-director-vs-jayakumar-on-10-june-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Managing Director vs Jayakumar on 10 June, 2009"}]},{"@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\/235651","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=235651"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/235651\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=235651"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=235651"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=235651"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}