{"id":236478,"date":"2009-08-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-08-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009"},"modified":"2018-05-20T19:13:52","modified_gmt":"2018-05-20T13:43:52","slug":"kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009","title":{"rendered":"Kedar Singh Kushwaha vs Dhaniram &amp; Anr on 4 August, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Kedar Singh Kushwaha vs Dhaniram &amp; Anr on 4 August, 2009<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: S Sinha<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: S.B. Sinha, Cyriac Joseph<\/div>\n<pre>                                                                        REPORTABLE\n\n                 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA\n\n                  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION\n\n                  CIVIL APPEAL NO.              OF 2009\n                 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.19564 of 2005)\n\n\nKedar Singh Kushwaha                                   ... Appellant\n\n                                   Versus\n\nDhaniram &amp; Anr.                                        ... Respondents\n\n\n\n\n                             JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>S.B. Sinha, J.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>1.    Leave granted.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>2.    Appellant was the Sub-Divisional Officer Pichhore.<\/p>\n<p>      In the said capacity, he was a Specified Officer for determination of<\/p>\n<p>election disputes in terms of the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Panchayats<\/p>\n<p>(Election Petition, Corrupt Practices and Disqualification for Membership)<\/p>\n<p>Rules, 1995 (for short, `the Rules&#8217;) framed in terms of Section 122 of the<\/p>\n<p>Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam (for short, `the Act&#8217;).<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>3.    Respondents 1 and 2 herein contested an election for the post of Sarpanch<\/p>\n<p>of Gram Panchayat, Khadoya, Block; Tehsil Pichhore. The second respondent<\/p>\n<p>was declared elected. Questioning the legality whereof, the first respondent<\/p>\n<p>filed an application for setting aside his election in the Court of Specified<\/p>\n<p>Officer, Pichhore. Upon hearing the parties, the Specified Officer directed<\/p>\n<p>recounting of all the votes polled in the said election. Relying on or on the basis<\/p>\n<p>of such re-counting, the election petition was dismissed.<\/p>\n<p>4.    Questioning the legality and\/or validity of the said order, the first<\/p>\n<p>respondent filed a writ petition before the High Court contending that the<\/p>\n<p>Specified Officer had no jurisdiction to direct re-counting of votes only on the<\/p>\n<p>ground that no objection was raised by the parties as prior thereto and that he<\/p>\n<p>was required to arrive at the conclusion that sufficient evidence had been<\/p>\n<p>brought on record by the parties for the said purpose.<\/p>\n<p>      It was also urged that such a judicial power could not have been<\/p>\n<p>delegated in favour of the Tehsildar.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>      A learned Single Judge of the High Court by reason of a judgment and<\/p>\n<p>order dated 24.7.1996 allowed the said writ petition, setting aside the order of<\/p>\n<p>the Specified Officer and remitted the matter back to it directing the election<\/p>\n<p>petition to be decided within two months. It was furthermore directed that the<\/p>\n<p>Specified Officer should also decide the preliminary objections raised by the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                        3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>respondent in the Election Petition. The parties were directed to appear before<\/p>\n<p>it on 19.8.1996.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>5.       Despite the said order, however, no action thereon was taken. Notices<\/p>\n<p>were issued only on 23.10.1997.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>         By reason of an order dated 30.12.1997, the appellant who was holding<\/p>\n<p>the post of the Specified Officer\/Sub-Divisional Officer at the relevant time,<\/p>\n<p>again directed for recounting of ballot papers. On the premise that by reason<\/p>\n<p>thereof the appellant had disobeyed the order of the High Court dated<\/p>\n<p>24.7.1996, a contempt petition was filed by the first respondent. It was pointed<\/p>\n<p>out that neither the preliminary objection was heard nor any evidence was<\/p>\n<p>recorded. It was furthermore pointed out that despite the fact that the period of<\/p>\n<p>two months expired on or about 18.10.1996 but without obtaining an order of<\/p>\n<p>extension from the High Court, he issued the said order for recounting of the<\/p>\n<p>votes.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>6.       The High Court issued Rule Nisi on the said application. Appellant was<\/p>\n<p>directed to remain present in the court. It, however, stands admitted that for one<\/p>\n<p>reason or the other, he did not appear before the Court and bailable warrants of<\/p>\n<p>his arrest were issued for his appearance on 6.5.1998.<\/p>\n<p>         Appellant filed a show-cause in the said contempt proceedings. Upon<\/p>\n<p>hearing the parties, the appellant was found guilty of willful disobedience of the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>order of the High Court and a fine of Rs.1,000\/- and his detention till the rising<\/p>\n<p>of the court, was directed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>7.    An intra-court appeal preferred by the appellant thereagainst in terms of<\/p>\n<p>Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was dismissed by reason of the<\/p>\n<p>impugned order dated 17.5.2005.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>8.    Mr. Banthia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, would<\/p>\n<p>submit that the High Court committed a serious error in passing the impugned<\/p>\n<p>judgment insofar as it failed to take into consideration that the matter came up<\/p>\n<p>before the appellant only in 1997 whereupon he took all necessary steps to<\/p>\n<p>dispose of the proceedings before him. It was urged that failure on the part of<\/p>\n<p>the appellant to appear before the high Court pursuant to the directions issued<\/p>\n<p>was occasioned by non-grant of permission therefor by the higher authorities.<\/p>\n<p>Our attention in this behalf has, inter alia, been drawn to an intimation given by<\/p>\n<p>the appellant to that effect before the Collector on 4.5.1998.<\/p>\n<p>9.    Indisputably, the appellant was the Specified Officer and in the said<\/p>\n<p>capacity was authorized to determine the election petition filed by the first<\/p>\n<p>respondent. The Election Petition filed by him was dismissed only on the basis<\/p>\n<p>of an order of recounting passed by the Specified Officer in respect whereof<\/p>\n<p>allegedly no objection was raised. The High Court, however, in its order dated<\/p>\n<p>24.7.1996, in clear terms, pointed out that the prescribed authority has no<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>jurisdiction in that behalf even with the consent of the parties. Relying on or,<\/p>\n<p>inter alia, on the basis of a decision of this Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/1259709\/\">P.K.K. Shamsudeen v.<\/p>\n<p>K.A.M. Mappillai Mohindeen &amp; Ors.<\/a> [AIR 1989 SC 640], the High Court made<\/p>\n<p>extensive reference to the Rules, to hold :\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>             &#8220;From the aforesaid rules, it is clear that any order of<br \/>\n             recounting can be passed after conclusion of the trial<br \/>\n             and the recounting can only be ordered by the Sub-<br \/>\n             Divisional Officer who is a prescribed authority to<br \/>\n             decide the dispute. The sub-divisional officer has not<br \/>\n             acted properly, inasmuch as it acted illegally in<br \/>\n             delegating the powers of recounting to the Tehsildar.<br \/>\n             The authority is described as Sub-Divisional Officer<br \/>\n             as the authority to decide the election petitions,<br \/>\n             therefore, any act done by the Tehsildar of recounting<br \/>\n             cannot be said to be proper and on the basis of<br \/>\n             recounting by the Tehsildar, the Sub-Divisional<br \/>\n             Officer gravely erred in dismissing the election<br \/>\n             petition. The order dismissing the election petition is<br \/>\n             hereby set aside with a direction to Sub-Divisional<br \/>\n             Officer to decide the petition according to law and<br \/>\n             shall also decide the preliminary objections raised by<br \/>\n             the respondents before him. He cannot shirk from his<br \/>\n             responsibility and delegate his powers to subordinate<br \/>\n             authority.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      It was on that premise that the aforementioned directions were issued.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>10.   Indisputably, the said order was not complied with as the election petition<\/p>\n<p>was not disposed of within the period specified therefor by the High Court.<\/p>\n<p>Indisputably again, pursuant to the order of the High Court, the parties appeared<\/p>\n<p>on 19.8.1996. The appellant, in his order sheet dated 3.12.1997, recorded that<\/p>\n<p>the order of the High Court was received on 28.2.1997. Why, despite the same,<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                        6<\/span><\/p>\n<p>he did not take any step to issue notices to the parties and proceeded to<\/p>\n<p>determine the issue before him has not been explained. The appellant, in his<\/p>\n<p>order dated 23.12.1997, proceeded on the basis that the High Court need not be<\/p>\n<p>approached for obtaining further directions from it.<\/p>\n<p>      From a perusal of the order dated 13.1.1998, it appears that proceedings<\/p>\n<p>started at 4 pm on that day, the ballot boxes were opened and a direction for<\/p>\n<p>recounting of the ballot papers was made. Indisputably, preliminary objections<\/p>\n<p>of the parties had not been determined. Why an order of recounting was passed<\/p>\n<p>despite the clear finding of the High Court has not been explained. The effect<\/p>\n<p>of the decision of this Court in P.K.K. Shamsudeen (supra) was also not taken<\/p>\n<p>into consideration. The premise on which the High Court passed its judgment<\/p>\n<p>dated 24.7.1996 was neither noticed nor considered.<\/p>\n<p>11.   It is now well settled that an order directing recounting must be preceded<\/p>\n<p>by application of mind by the Prescribed Authority. [<a href=\"\/doc\/249842\/\">See M. Chinnasamy v.<\/p>\n<p>K.C. Palanisamy &amp; Ors.<\/a> [(2004) 6 SCC 341] and Chandrika Prasad Yadav v.<\/p>\n<p>State of Bihar &amp; Ors. [(2004) 6 SCC 331]<\/p>\n<p>      It is, thus, idle to contend that the appellant did not understand the effect<\/p>\n<p>and purport of the order. The High Court, in our opinion, has rightly arrived at<\/p>\n<p>a finding that as a responsible and high ranking officer, the said plea was not<\/p>\n<p>available to him. He, therefore, could not have committed the same error as<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         7<\/span><\/p>\n<p>was done by his predecessor in office. Even during the proceedings before the<\/p>\n<p>High Court, appellant&#8217;s conduct was not above board. Why he could not appear<\/p>\n<p>before the High Court at the earliest possible opportunity has not been properly<\/p>\n<p>explained. In terms of the Rules framed by the High Court under the Contempt<\/p>\n<p>of Courts Act, the appellant has rightly been called upon to appear. He could<\/p>\n<p>not have ignored the same on the premise that the Collector did not give him<\/p>\n<p>permission therefor. Even otherwise, no order refusing such permission by the<\/p>\n<p>Collector has been brought on record.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>12.   Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the<\/p>\n<p>opinion that no case has been made out for interference with the impugned<\/p>\n<p>judgment. This appeal is, therefore, dismissed.         However, in the facts and<\/p>\n<p>circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.<\/p>\n<p>                                                &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.J.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                  [S.B. Sinha]<\/p>\n<p>                                                &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.J.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                  [Cyriac Joseph]<br \/>\nNew Delhi;\n<\/p>\n<p>August 4, 2009<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Kedar Singh Kushwaha vs Dhaniram &amp; Anr on 4 August, 2009 Author: S Sinha Bench: S.B. Sinha, Cyriac Joseph REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.19564 of 2005) Kedar Singh Kushwaha &#8230; Appellant Versus Dhaniram &amp; Anr. [&hellip;]<\/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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-236478","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Kedar Singh Kushwaha vs Dhaniram &amp; Anr on 4 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kedar Singh Kushwaha vs Dhaniram &amp; Anr on 4 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-08-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-20T13:43:52+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kedar Singh Kushwaha vs Dhaniram &amp; Anr on 4 August, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-20T13:43:52+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1466,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009\",\"name\":\"Kedar Singh Kushwaha vs Dhaniram &amp; Anr on 4 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-20T13:43:52+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kedar Singh Kushwaha vs Dhaniram &amp; Anr on 4 August, 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":"Kedar Singh Kushwaha vs Dhaniram &amp; Anr on 4 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kedar Singh Kushwaha vs Dhaniram &amp; Anr on 4 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-08-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-20T13:43:52+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kedar Singh Kushwaha vs Dhaniram &amp; Anr on 4 August, 2009","datePublished":"2009-08-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-20T13:43:52+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009"},"wordCount":1466,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009","name":"Kedar Singh Kushwaha vs Dhaniram &amp; Anr on 4 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-08-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-20T13:43:52+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kedar-singh-kushwaha-vs-dhaniram-anr-on-4-august-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kedar Singh Kushwaha vs Dhaniram &amp; Anr on 4 August, 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\/236478","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=236478"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/236478\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=236478"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=236478"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=236478"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}