{"id":235938,"date":"2009-10-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009"},"modified":"2018-01-26T05:39:59","modified_gmt":"2018-01-26T00:09:59","slug":"suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"Suresh Babu vs Geetha Santhosh on 19 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Suresh Babu vs Geetha Santhosh on 19 October, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRSA.No. 1026 of 2009()\n\n\n1. SURESH BABU, AGED 55 YEARS,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. GEETHA SANTHOSH, W\/O.SANTHOSH,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.X.VARGHESE\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.ANIL S.RAJ\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH\n\n Dated :19\/10\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                            THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J.\n                           --------------------------------------\n                              R.S.A.No.1026 of 2009\n                           --------------------------------------\n                   Dated this the 19th day of October, 2009.\n\n                                     JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
       This Second Appeal arises from judgment of the learned Sub Judge,<\/p>\n
Kochi in A.S.No.41 of 2009 dismissing the appeal as barred by limitation.<\/p>\n
       2.     Appellant and respondent are uterine siblings. Property belonged<\/p>\n
to the appellant and his mother in equal shares. Appellant filed O.S.No.605 of<\/p>\n
2005 against respondent claiming          absolute title and possession of the suit<\/p>\n
property on the strength of an agreement for sale allegedly executed by the<\/p>\n
mother in favour of appellant. Respondent in turn filed O.S.No.165 of 2006<\/p>\n
claiming that on the death of the mother her half share devolved on appellant<\/p>\n
and respondent equally and thus she has one fourth share in the suit property,<\/p>\n
remaining 3\/4th    going to the appellant.          Both suites    were tried together.<\/p>\n
O.S.No.605 of 2005 ended in dismissal which was not challenged and has<\/p>\n
become final. O.S.No.165 of 2006 was decreed and preliminary decree for<\/p>\n
partition as above stated was passed. That preliminary decree was challenged<\/p>\n
by the appellant in A.S.No.23 of 2007 but the appeal was dismissed. There is no<\/p>\n
further appeal on that judgment and preliminary decree and accordingly the<\/p>\n
preliminary decree has become final. Respondent filed application for passing a<\/p>\n
final decree and final decree was passed on the basis of Exts.C1 to C4.         With a<\/p>\n
delay of 440 days appellant preferred A.S.No.41 of 2009 accompanied by<\/p>\n
RSA No.1026\/2009<\/p>\n
                                         2<\/span><\/p>\n
I.A.No.423 of 2009 to condone the delay.           First appellate court was not<\/p>\n
impressed by the reasons stated by the appellant to condone the delay.<\/p>\n
Application to condone delay was dismissed and consequently appeal also was<\/p>\n
dismissed. Hence this Second appeal. Substantial questions of law raised in<\/p>\n
the memorandum of appeal are whether first appellate court was bound to<\/p>\n
consider the grounds taken in the memorandum of appeal before disposing of<\/p>\n
the appeal, whether the findings of the courts below are supported by evidence,<\/p>\n
whether the finding of the first appellate court that preliminary decree passed is<\/p>\n
correct and there is no need of interference and whether the first appellate court<\/p>\n
has correctly followed the dictum laid down by the Supreme Court in<\/p>\n
N.Balakrishnan v. M.Krishnamurthy<\/a> [(1998) 7 SCC 123] and State<\/p>\n
of Nagaland v. Lipok Ao and others<\/a> [(2005) 3 SCC 752]?.\n<\/p>\n
       3.     When an application to condone delay             is dismissed and<\/p>\n
consequently appeal is also dismissed, there is a decree in which the decree of<\/p>\n
the trial court would get merged and hence the Second Appeal is maintainable.<\/p>\n
In this Second Appeal, appellant can challenge the correctness of the order<\/p>\n
dismissing the application to condone the delay. In this case, the reason stated<\/p>\n
for condonation of delay is that A.S.No.23 of 2007 against preliminary decree<\/p>\n
was pending, in the meantime final decree was passed and then A.S.No.23 of<\/p>\n
RSA No.1026\/2009<\/p>\n
                                          3<\/span><\/p>\n
2007 was dismissed as infructuous. Appellant then filed I.A.No.304 of 2008 in<\/p>\n
that appeal (for review) which also was dismissed.           Pendency of those<\/p>\n
proceedings is stated to be the reason for the delay in filing A.S.No.41 of 2009<\/p>\n
against the final decree.     I am told that dismissal of A.S.No.23 of 2007 was<\/p>\n
challenged in this Court, judgment in A.S.No.23 of 2007 was set aside and the<\/p>\n
matter was remitted to the first appellate court for fresh consideration and<\/p>\n
thereafter the appeal was dismissed on merit. That judgment and decree are not<\/p>\n
challenged in appeal and thus the preliminary decree became final. A.S.No.41<\/p>\n
of 2009 was preferred against the final decree on 17.3.2009 with a delay of 440<\/p>\n
days. In the affidavit in support of the application to condone delay it is stated<\/p>\n
that delay occurred since A.S.No.23 of 2007 was pending. That according to the<\/p>\n
first appellate court is not a sound reason and the application was dismissed. It<\/p>\n
is appropriate to refer to the facts of the case to decide whether there is a<\/p>\n
substance or bonafides in the application to condone the delay. Learned Munsiff<\/p>\n
passed the final decree basing on Exts.C1 to C4. Copy of the final judgment on<\/p>\n
I.A.No.260 of 2007 on the basis of which final decree was passed (a certified<\/p>\n
copy of that final judgment is not produced along with the Second Appeal) which<\/p>\n
learned counsel for respondent gave me for perusal       states that appellant did<\/p>\n
not prefer any objection to Exts.C1 to C4 though sufficient opportunity was<\/p>\n
given. There was also no representation for the appellant in the court of<\/p>\n
RSA No.1026\/2009<\/p>\n
                                           4<\/span><\/p>\n
learned Munsiff on the day the application for passing final decree was heard<\/p>\n
by the   learned Munsiff. Learned Munsiff allotted       plot A  in Ext.C2 to the<\/p>\n
respondent and plot C (in Ext.C2) to the appellant. Plot B (a small plot) was<\/p>\n
kept common to be used as a pathway for access to the respective plots.<\/p>\n
Appellant was directed to pay Rs.24,483\/- as owelty to the respondent within<\/p>\n
one month from the date of judgment.\n<\/p>\n
      4.      On going through the order on I.A.No.423 of 2009in A.S.No.41 of<\/p>\n
2009 I find that there is no justifiable reason stated by the appellant to condone<\/p>\n
delay. That, A.S.No.23 of 2007 was pending is no ground not to file appeal<\/p>\n
against the final judgment and decree. It is not as if appellant was prevented by<\/p>\n
any other cause from filing the appeal on time. Learned counsel for appellant<\/p>\n
has   placed     reliance   on      the   decisions   in   N.Balakrishnan       v.<\/p>\n
M.Krishnamurthy<\/a> [(1998) 7 SCC 123] and State of Nagaland v.<\/p>\n
Lipok Ao and others<\/a> [(2005) 3 SCC 752] to contend that in the matter of<\/p>\n
condonation of delay court has to adopt a liberal approach and that it is not the<\/p>\n
length of delay that matters. It is to be ascertained whether delay is willfully<\/p>\n
caused. But, liberal approach has to be on the facts pleaded. I must also keep<\/p>\n
in mind that the law of limitation is not an equitable statute. This is a case<\/p>\n
where parties are fighting from 2005 onwards over a small plot of land. Learned<\/p>\n
RSA No.1026\/2009<\/p>\n
                                          5<\/span><\/p>\n
counsel for respondent points out from the memorandum of appeal in A.S.No.41<\/p>\n
of 2009 that all the grounds urged in that appeal are in challenge of the<\/p>\n
preliminary decree which has already become final and not in respect of the<\/p>\n
allotment of shares made in the final decree or the owelty awarded.           First<\/p>\n
appellate court found that there is no justifiable reason to condone the delay and<\/p>\n
exercised tits discretion not to condone the delay. No substantial question of<\/p>\n
law is involved requiring this Court to interfere.\n<\/p>\n
       Resultantly, this Second Appeal fails. It is dismissed.<\/p>\n
       I.A.No.2286 of 2009 will stand dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                                 THOMAS P.JOSEPH,
\n                                                         Judge.\n<\/p>\n
cks<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Suresh Babu vs Geetha Santhosh on 19 October, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RSA.No. 1026 of 2009() 1. SURESH BABU, AGED 55 YEARS, … Petitioner Vs 1. GEETHA SANTHOSH, W\/O.SANTHOSH, … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.A.X.VARGHESE For Respondent :SRI.ANIL S.RAJ The Hon’ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH Dated :19\/10\/2009 O […]<\/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-235938","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSuresh Babu vs Geetha Santhosh on 19 October, 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\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Suresh Babu vs Geetha Santhosh on 19 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-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=\"2009-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-01-26T00:09:59+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Suresh Babu vs Geetha Santhosh on 19 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-26T00:09:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1111,\"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\\\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009\",\"name\":\"Suresh Babu vs Geetha Santhosh on 19 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-26T00:09:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Suresh Babu vs Geetha Santhosh on 19 October, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"Suresh Babu vs Geetha Santhosh on 19 October, 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\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Suresh Babu vs Geetha Santhosh on 19 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-01-26T00:09:59+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Suresh Babu vs Geetha Santhosh on 19 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-26T00:09:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009"},"wordCount":1111,"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\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009","name":"Suresh Babu vs Geetha Santhosh on 19 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-26T00:09:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/suresh-babu-vs-geetha-santhosh-on-19-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Suresh Babu vs Geetha Santhosh on 19 October, 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:\/\/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\/235938","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=235938"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/235938\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=235938"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=235938"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=235938"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}