{"id":236207,"date":"2008-09-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008"},"modified":"2016-05-06T19:51:17","modified_gmt":"2016-05-06T14:21:17","slug":"raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"Raja Ram vs Angoori Devi And Others on 1 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Raja Ram vs Angoori Devi And Others on 1 September, 2008<\/div>\n
RSA No. 2770 of 2008                    1\n\n       In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh\n                                 ...\n\n\n                                        RSA No. 2770 of 2008\n\n                                        Date of decision: September 1,2008\n\nRaja Ram                                                          ..Appellant.\n\n                                   Versus\n\nAngoori Devi and others                                    ..Respondents\n\nCoram:        Hon'ble Mr.Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg\n\nPresent:     Mr. P.R.Yadav, Advocate\n             for the appellant.\n                       ...\n\nRakesh Kumar Garg,J.\n<\/pre>\n
      The present appeal has been filed by the plaintiff against the judgment<\/p>\n
and decrees of the courts below whereby his suit for specific performance of<\/p>\n
agreement for sale dated 12.4.1994 has been decreed against Munshi Singh<\/p>\n
defendant only.\n<\/p>\n
              In brief the case of the appellant is that the contesting<\/p>\n
respondent\/defendant No.1 and 2 agreed to sell their land measuring 10 kanals<\/p>\n
7 marlas situated in the revenue estate of village Kanti Tehsil Narnaul District<\/p>\n
Mahindergarh on 12.4.1994 for a sale consideration of Rs. 87,000\/- on payment<\/p>\n
of Rs.40000\/- as earnest money and executed an agreement for sale in this<\/p>\n
regard. The defendants were to execute the sale deed on 31.5.1994 on receipt<\/p>\n
of remaining sale consideration of Rs.47, 000\/-. However, the sale could not be<\/p>\n
executed on that date by the defendants and thereafter defendant No.1<\/p>\n
extended the period for execution of the sale deed on 6.6.1994 till 30.6.1995 on<\/p>\n
receipt of further earnest money of Rs.32, 000\/-. It is the case of the plaintiff that<\/p>\n
he also promised to get the sale deed executed by defendant No.2 as well. The<\/p>\n
plaintiff asked the contesting defendant to execute the sale deed and perform<\/p>\n
their part of agreement several times and the contesting defendants promised to<\/p>\n
execute the sale deed on 3.7.1995 (30.6.1995, 1.7.1995 and 2.7.1995 being<\/p>\n
holidays). The plaintiff and performa defendants reached in the office of the Sub
\n RSA No. 2770 of 2008                  2<\/span><\/p>\n
Registrar, Ateli on 3.7.1995 with remaining sale consideration and expenses for<\/p>\n
registration of sale deed. However, the defendants did not turn up. The plaintiffs<\/p>\n
sent a notice to the contesting defendants asking them to come present on<\/p>\n
17.7.1995 in the office of Sub Registrar Ateli to receive the remaining sale<\/p>\n
consideration and execute the sale deed as per the terms and conditions of the<\/p>\n
original agreement for sale dated 12.4.1994. The plaintiff on 16.7.1995 and<\/p>\n
17.7.1995 remained present in the office of Sub Registrar Ateli with remaining<\/p>\n
sale consideration and expenses for registration of sale deed but the contesting<\/p>\n
defendants did not turn up. He got his presence marked in the office of Sub<\/p>\n
Registrar Ateli. It is the case of the plaintiff and performa defendants that they<\/p>\n
were always ready and willing to perform their part of agreement and they are<\/p>\n
still ready and willing to perform their part of the agreement. But the contesting<\/p>\n
defendant are not    willing to perform their part of the agreement and they<\/p>\n
intentionally and deliberately did not come present in the office of Sub Registrar<\/p>\n
Ateli to execute the sale deed on the dates fixed. Hence, the suit for specific<\/p>\n
performance of the agreement for sale dated 12.4.1994 by the contesting<\/p>\n
defendants No.1 and 2 and in alternative for recovery of the double of the<\/p>\n
earnest money paid by the plaintiff and performa defendants to contesting<\/p>\n
defendants No.1 and 2.\n<\/p>\n
             The suit was contested by the defendant Nos.1 and 2 by filing<\/p>\n
separate written statements admitting the execution of the agreement for sale<\/p>\n
dated 12.4.1994 after receipt of Rs.40000\/- as earnest money but asserted that<\/p>\n
the plaintiff and performa defendants were not in possession of the remaining<\/p>\n
sale consideration and expenses of registration of the sale deed as per terms<\/p>\n
and conditions of the agreement of sale dated 12.4.1994. It was also asserted<\/p>\n
that the contesting defendant No.1 on 6.6.1994 on receipt of Rs.32000\/- as<\/p>\n
additional earnest money did not extend the period for registration of the sale<\/p>\n
deed up to 30.6.1995 and defendant No.2 did not authorize him to extend the<\/p>\n
sale deed on behalf of defendant No.2.\n<\/p>\n
             The trial Court decreed the suit for specific performance of the
\n RSA No. 2770 of 2008                   3<\/span><\/p>\n
agreement of sale dated 12.4.1994 to the effect that defendant No.1 will execute<\/p>\n
the sale deed in favour of plaintiff in regard to his share as agreed upon<\/p>\n
according to terms of the agreement to sale dated 12.4.1994 in favour of the<\/p>\n
plaintiff and proforma defendants to the extent of his share but for payment of<\/p>\n
balance amount of Rs.15000\/- only to defendant No.1 as plaintiff has already<\/p>\n
paid the amount of consideration of Rs.72000\/- out of the agreed amount of Rs.<\/p>\n
87000\/-.\n<\/p>\n
             Aggrieved against the said judgment and decree of the trial Court,<\/p>\n
the appellant filed further appeal which was decided vide judgment and decree<\/p>\n
dated 31.3.2008, vide which, judgment of the lower Court was modified and<\/p>\n
resultantly a decree for specific performance of the agreement for sale dated<\/p>\n
12.4.1994 to the extent of the share of the land of defendant No.1 in the entire<\/p>\n
suit land measuring 10 kanals 7 marlas is passed in favour of the plaintiff on<\/p>\n
payment of proportionate sale consideration.\n<\/p>\n
             Still aggrieved, the plaintiffs has filed the present appeal praying<\/p>\n
therein to set aside the judgment and decrees of the courts below to the extent<\/p>\n
of dismissing his suit qua defendant No.2 with a further prayer to fully decree the<\/p>\n
case of the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
             Shri P.R. Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant has argued that<\/p>\n
the courts below have wrongly dismissed the suit of appellant qua Lakshmi Devi<\/p>\n
defendant No.2. According to him, it is an admitted case of the parties that<\/p>\n
defendants Nos.1 and 2, namely, Munshi Singh and Lakshmi Devi brother and<\/p>\n
sister entered into an agreement dated 12.4.1994 to sell their 10 kanals 7 marlas<\/p>\n
agricultural land for Rs.87,000\/- and out of which an earnest money of<\/p>\n
Rs.40,000\/- was jointly received by Munshi Singh and Smt. Lakshmi Devi. It has<\/p>\n
also been admitted by defendant No.1 that the possession of the suit property<\/p>\n
was handed over to the appellant on the same day. Thereafter, as per the<\/p>\n
agreement the sale deed was to be executed up to 31.5.1994. The defendants<\/p>\n
could not get the sale deed executed on 31.5,.1994 and therefore, on 6.6.1994,<\/p>\n
the appellant paid a further amount of Rs.32,000\/- to defendant No.1 Munshi
\n RSA No. 2770 of 2008                   4<\/span><\/p>\n
Singh who had received the same on behalf of his sister also and also signed<\/p>\n
the agreement regarding extension of time till 30.6.1995. The courts below have<\/p>\n
wrongly presumed that defendant No.1 has no authority to extend the time limit<\/p>\n
regarding land of defendant No.2 Smt. Lakshmi Devi. From the conduct of the<\/p>\n
defendant, it is crystal clear that time was not essence of the contract and the<\/p>\n
defendants had received most of the earnest money and only Rs.15, 000\/- was<\/p>\n
left. Thus the appellant was always ready and willing to perform his part of<\/p>\n
contract.\n<\/p>\n
             Learned counsel has further argued that the initial amount was<\/p>\n
received jointly by defendants Nos.1 and 2 and Lakshmi Devi has not brought<\/p>\n
any evidence to prove that she made any effort to get the sale deed executed.<\/p>\n
Not only this, defendant No.2 Smt. Lakshmi Devi only filed the written statement<\/p>\n
and she did not appear in the witness box to refute the charges against her and<\/p>\n
therefore, the courts below ought to have drawn an adverse inference against<\/p>\n
her and ought to have decreed the suit of the plaintiff-appellant against her also.<\/p>\n
On the basis of this argument, learned counsel for the appellant has raised the<\/p>\n
substantial question of law, which is as under:-\n<\/p>\n
             ” Whether once the defendant No.2 had jointly entered into an<\/p>\n
             agreement with the appellant and the time limit of the same was<\/p>\n
             extended by defendant No.1, the time limit for defendant No.2<\/p>\n
             would also stand extended being real sister of defendant No.1 and<\/p>\n
             especially when no steps were taken by either of the defendants to<\/p>\n
             get the possession back?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      I have heard learned counsel for the appellant. However, I find no force in<\/p>\n
the contentions raised by him. Undisputedly, defendant No.2 Lakshmi Devi has<\/p>\n
not extended the period of execution of sale deed after 31.5.1994. The case of<\/p>\n
the appellant is that defendant No.1 has signed the extension of the period for<\/p>\n
execution of sale deed on 6.6.1994 up to 30.6.1995 on receipt of further earnest<\/p>\n
money of Rs.32000\/- on his behalf as well as on behalf of defendant No.2 also to<\/p>\n
get the sale deed executed on 30.6.1995 . However, the appellant has miserably
\n RSA No. 2770 of 2008                   5<\/span><\/p>\n
failed to prove his assertion to his extent. There is not an iota of evidence from<\/p>\n
which it can be made out that defendant No.1 was authorized to extend the<\/p>\n
period for execution of sale deed on behalf of defendant No.2 as well. Thus,<\/p>\n
there was no question of extension of time limit on behalf of defendant No.2 to<\/p>\n
execute the sale deed simply because she had jointly entered into an agreement<\/p>\n
with defendant No.1 and the time limit of the same was extended by defendant<\/p>\n
No.1 only. The findings recorded by the courts below in this case are pure<\/p>\n
findings of fact which have been recorded after due appreciation of evidence on<\/p>\n
record of the case.\n<\/p>\n
      I find no infirmity or illegality in the judgment and decrees of the courts<\/p>\n
below. No substantial question of law arises in this appeal.<\/p>\n
                   Dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
September 1 , 2008                                 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG)\n      nk                                                  JUDGE\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Raja Ram vs Angoori Devi And Others on 1 September, 2008 RSA No. 2770 of 2008 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh … RSA No. 2770 of 2008 Date of decision: September 1,2008 Raja Ram ..Appellant. Versus Angoori Devi and others ..Respondents Coram: 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":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-236207","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nRaja Ram vs Angoori Devi And Others on 1 September, 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\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Raja Ram vs Angoori Devi And Others on 1 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-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=\"2008-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-06T14:21:17+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Raja Ram vs Angoori Devi And Others on 1 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-06T14:21:17+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1468,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008\",\"name\":\"Raja Ram vs Angoori Devi And Others on 1 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-06T14:21:17+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Raja Ram vs Angoori Devi And Others on 1 September, 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:\/\/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":"Raja Ram vs Angoori Devi And Others on 1 September, 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\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Raja Ram vs Angoori Devi And Others on 1 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-06T14:21:17+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Raja Ram vs Angoori Devi And Others on 1 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-06T14:21:17+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008"},"wordCount":1468,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008","name":"Raja Ram vs Angoori Devi And Others on 1 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-06T14:21:17+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raja-ram-vs-angoori-devi-and-others-on-1-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Raja Ram vs Angoori Devi And Others on 1 September, 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:\/\/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\/236207","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=236207"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/236207\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=236207"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=236207"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=236207"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}