{"id":239459,"date":"2010-05-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-05-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010"},"modified":"2017-06-13T11:21:59","modified_gmt":"2017-06-13T05:51:59","slug":"mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010","title":{"rendered":"Mahammed Saud &amp; Anr vs V on 22 May, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Orissa High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Mahammed Saud &amp; Anr vs V on 22 May, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>                     V.GOPALA GOWDA, CJ &amp; L.MOHAPATRA, J.\n<\/pre>\n<p>            WRIT APPEAL NO.107 OF 2009. (Decided 22.5.2010).\n<\/p>\n<pre>MAHAMMED SAUD &amp; ANR.                                ............          Appellants.\n                                     .V.\nDR.(MAJ) SHAIKH MAHAFOOZ &amp; ORS.                      ............         Respondents.\n\n\nCIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 (ACT NO.5 OF 1908) - SEC.151.\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>    For Appellants &#8211; M\/s. R.C.Sarangi, S.Das, P.K.Singh, M.K.Patnaik<br \/>\n                      &amp; S.S.Mohanty.\n<\/p>\n<p>    For Respondents &#8211; M\/s. B.Routray, D.K.Mohapatra, B.B.Routray &amp;<br \/>\n                      S.Jena (For R-1)<br \/>\n                      M\/s. Yeeshan Mohanty, P.C.Biswal, S.N.Mishra,<br \/>\n                      M.R.Samal &amp; B.P.Das (For R-2)<br \/>\n                      M\/s. A.P.Bose (For R-3)<\/p>\n<p>L.MOHAPATRA, J.          This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 3.7.2009<br \/>\npassed by the learned Single Judge in Misc.Case No.397 of 2009 arising out of<br \/>\nF.A.O.No.386 of 2007.\n<\/p>\n<p>2. Learned counsel for the respondents raised a preliminary objection with regard to<br \/>\nmaintainability of the appeal. In order to determine the question as to whether this<br \/>\nappeal is maintainable or not, it is necessary to look into the facts leading to filing of this<br \/>\nappeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>3. F.A.O.No.386 of 2007 had been filed before this Court challenging the order dated<br \/>\n9.9.2005 passed by the learned Ad hoc Additional District Judge, F.T.C.No.3,<br \/>\nBhubaneswar in Interim Application No.12 of 2005 arising out of C.S.No.492 of 2004<br \/>\nrejecting the application filed by the present respondents for appointment of receiver<br \/>\nunder Order 40, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure and directing both parties to<br \/>\nmaintain detailed accounts of the suit property and produce the same in future, if<br \/>\nrequired by the Court. The learned Single Judge disposed of the aforesaid appeal by<br \/>\norder dated 6.8.2008 directing the trial court to put the property into auction between the<br \/>\nparties fixing the off-set price not less than Rs.50,000\/- and further directing that the<br \/>\nhighest bidder, on depositing the bid amount, shall be given in possession of the<br \/>\nproperty and the said arrangement shall continue each year till disposal of the suit. In<br \/>\npursuance of the said order passed by the learned Single Judge, the property was put to<br \/>\nauction by the trial court and the parties participated in the auction. Defendant No.3-<br \/>\nShaik Mahfooz, who is respondent no.3 in this appeal, became the highest bidder, but<br \/>\nhe failed to deposit the bid amount in court. Even though time was extended up to<br \/>\n29.4.2009, the said respondent no.3 did not deposit the amount and plaintiff no.1, who<br \/>\nis respondent no.1 before this Court, being the next highest bidder was directed to<br \/>\ndeposit the bid amount by 14.5.2009 and become the receiver of the property in<br \/>\nquestion. He deposited the bid amount on 12.5.2009 and filed a memo for being<br \/>\nappointed as receiver of the property. The present appellants, who are defendants 1 and<br \/>\n2 along with respondent no.3 objected to the said prayer on the ground that plaintiff-<br \/>\nrespondent no.1 cannot be given possession of the property in question as there is no<br \/>\n such order. Before the said order dated 16.5.2009, Misc.Case No.637 of 2008 was filed<br \/>\nin the aforesaid disposed of appeal before this Court for modification and in the said<br \/>\nMisc.Case, a clarification was made by this Court to the extent that the property shall<br \/>\ninclude the hotel and restaurant running in the name and style of M\/s.Hotel Sahara(Unit<br \/>\nof Hotel Oasis(P) Ltd.) and, therefore the trial court in the said order dated 16.5.2009<br \/>\nappointed the plaintiff-respondent no.1 as the receiver in respect of Hotel and restaurant<br \/>\nas stated above. The present appellants were directed to hand over possession of the<br \/>\nsaid property to plaintiff-respondent no.1. The said order of the trial court was not<br \/>\ncomplied with and an application was filed by the plaintiff-respondentno.1 alleging<br \/>\ntherein that though he has been appointed as receiver and the defendant-appellants<br \/>\nwere directed to hand over possession of the said hotel, they refused to hand over the<br \/>\npossession for which the matter has been reported before the concerned Police Station<br \/>\nand a prayer was made for police help to take possession of the said hotel. The petition<br \/>\nwas resisted on the ground that time till 22nd May, 2009 had been granted to take<br \/>\npossession of the hotel and the said time had not expired. Therefore, by order dated<br \/>\n22.5.2009, the trial court rejected the petition as premature. On 22.5.2009, another<br \/>\nsimilar application was filed by the plaintiff-respondent no.1 and when the matter stood<br \/>\nthus, Misc.Case No.397 of 2009 was filed in this Court in the above disposed of F.A.O.<br \/>\nand in the said Misc.Case, order was passed to provide adequate protection to the<br \/>\nreceiver appointed to take possession of the property in question. The said order is the<br \/>\nsubject matter of challenge in this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>4. Learned counsel for the respondents relied on a Full Bench decision of this Court<br \/>\nreported in 2008(II) OLR(FB)-725 arising out of the present case to substantiate his<br \/>\ncontention that the present appeal is not maintainable. The Full Bench in the aforesaid<br \/>\ndecision came to the following conclusions as reflected in paragraph 47 of the<br \/>\njudgment, which is quoted below:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>               &#8220;We have heard the learned counsel for the parties patiently, noted the<br \/>\n       citations carefully, perused the materials meticulously and considered the<br \/>\n       submissions pragmatically and for the discussions made above, we have arrived<br \/>\n       at the following conclusions :\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>(1)    After introduction of Section 100-A in the Code of Civil Procedure by 2002<br \/>\n       Amendment Act, no Letters Patent Appeal is maintainable against a<br \/>\n       judgment\/order\/decree passed by a learned Single Judge of a High Court.<br \/>\n(2)    The decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Birat Ch. Dagra case (supra)<br \/>\n       has not laid down the correct position of law. On the other hand, the conclusions<br \/>\n       arrived at by Division Benches of this Court in V.N.N. Panicker and Ramesh<br \/>\n       Ch.Das cases (supra) are held to be good law and are confirmed.<br \/>\n(3)    A writ Appeal shall lie against the judgment\/orders passed by a learned Single<br \/>\n       Judge in a Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In a<br \/>\n       Writ Application filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, if any<br \/>\n       order\/judgment\/decree is passed in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226, a<br \/>\n       Writ Appeal will lie, whereas no Writ Appeal will lie against<br \/>\n       judgment\/order\/decree passed by a Single Judge exercising powers of<br \/>\n       superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution.\n<\/p>\n<p>(4)    No Letters Patent Appeal shall lie against judgment\/order passed by a learned<br \/>\n       Single Judge in proceedings arising out of Special Acts.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p> 5.      With reference to the aforesaid judgment, Shri Sarangi, learned counsel<br \/>\nappearing for the appellants submitted that after disposal of F.A.O., learned Single<br \/>\nJudge has become functus officio and could not have entertained any further<br \/>\nMisc.Cases for further orders and only Misc.Cases for the purpose of correction or<br \/>\nmodification could be entertained after disposal of the appeal. It was further submitted by<br \/>\nthe learned counsel for the appellants that the order passed by the learned Single Judge<br \/>\nafter disposal of the appeal has no connection with the issue involved in the F.A.O. and,<br \/>\ntherefore, such orders could only be passed in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226<br \/>\nof the Constitution of India and, therefore, the present appeal is maintainable in view of<br \/>\nthe Full Bench decision. Reference was made to several decisions by the learned<br \/>\ncounsel for the appellants in order to substantiate the above contention and the said<br \/>\ndecisions are as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>A.I.R.2008 S.C.77 (Narpat Singh Vrs. Rajasthan Financial Corporation),<br \/>\n2008(72)AIC 183(S.C.) (Sachida Nanda Lal @ Sachida Nand Shah Vrs. State of<br \/>\nBihar (Now Jharkhand), 1 (2008) CLT 194(SC) (Gaudiya Mission Vrs. Shobha Bose<br \/>\nand another), 1 (2008) CLT 199(SC) ( State of M.P. and others Vrs. Madhukar Rao),<br \/>\n(2008) 7 Supreme Court Cases 738 (M.V.Janardhan Reddy Vrs. Vijaya Bank and<br \/>\nothers), 2003 SAR (Civil) 583 SC (Sh.Dwark Prasad Agarwal(D)) by L.rs. and<br \/>\nanother Vrs. B.D. Agarwal and others), AIR 1988 Supreme Court 1531 (A.R.Antulay<br \/>\nVrs. R.S.Nayak and another), 2009 AIAR (Civil) 235 (U.P.State Road Transport<br \/>\nCorporation Vrs. Assistant Commissioner of Police (Traffic) Delhi), AIR 2008 SC<br \/>\n690 (State of Rajasthan Vrs. Ganeshi Lal), AIR 2008 Supreme Court<br \/>\n863( Government of Karnataka and others Vrs. Gowramma and others), AIR 2008<br \/>\nSupreme Court 403( Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vrs. Smt.Raj Kumari and others)<br \/>\nand 2009(2) CCC 73 (SC) (Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and<br \/>\nanother Vrs. Bal Mukunda Bairwa).\n<\/p>\n<p>6. After careful perusal of the decisions cited by the learned counsel appearing for the<br \/>\nappellants, though we find that there is no direct bearing of the issues involved in these<br \/>\nreported cases with the issue involved in this appeal,      there    is substance in the<br \/>\nsubmission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellants that after disposal of<br \/>\nF.A.O., learned Single Judge could not have entertained the Misc. Petitions for different<br \/>\npurposes and only applications for modification or correction of orders could be<br \/>\nentertained. Therefore, even if it is construed that the order impugned in this appeal is<br \/>\nwithout jurisdiction, the learned Single Judge having became functus officio after<br \/>\ndisposal of the appeal, the said order is not appealable. The only conclusion one can<br \/>\narrived at is that the impugned order has been passed in exercise of inherent powers<br \/>\nunder Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure and, therefore, the writ appeal against<br \/>\nthe said order cannot be maintained. The learned counsel for the appellants made a<br \/>\nreference to Section 100-A of the Code of Civil Procedure and also Clause 10 of the<br \/>\nLetters Patent Appeal to substantiate his submission that the appeal is maintainable.<br \/>\nThe submissions made by the learned counsel Shri Sarangi in this regard were also<br \/>\nargued by him before the Full Bench but such submissions were not accepted and the<br \/>\nCourt specifically came to a conclusion that only an order passed by the learned Single<br \/>\nJudge under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can be subjected to an appeal, but<br \/>\nany order passed by the High Court in exercise of its power superintendence under<br \/>\nArticle 227 of the Constitution of India is not appealable. The Full Bench also held that<br \/>\nno Letter Patent Appeal shall lie against any judgment\/order passed by the learned<br \/>\nSingle Judge in proceedings arising out of Special Acts. The F.A.O. had been filed under<br \/>\nOrder 43, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the order passed by the learned<br \/>\nSingle Judge after disposal of the appeal can only be construed to be one in exercise of<br \/>\n jurisdiction under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Therefore, applying the<br \/>\nprinciples laid down by the this Court in the aforesaid Full Bench decision, this appeal is<br \/>\nnot maintainable. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as not maintainable.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.    Before parting with the case, we would like to make an observation that after<br \/>\ndisposal of a case, as observed by the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court in some of the decisions<br \/>\nreferred to above, no further Misc. Cases should be entertained except for the purpose<br \/>\nof correction or modification.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                   Writ appeal dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Orissa High Court Mahammed Saud &amp; Anr vs V on 22 May, 2010 V.GOPALA GOWDA, CJ &amp; L.MOHAPATRA, J. WRIT APPEAL NO.107 OF 2009. (Decided 22.5.2010). MAHAMMED SAUD &amp; ANR. &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; Appellants. .V. DR.(MAJ) SHAIKH MAHAFOOZ &amp; ORS. &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; Respondents. CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 (ACT NO.5 OF 1908) &#8211; SEC.151. For Appellants &#8211; M\/s. R.C.Sarangi, [&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":[8,25],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-239459","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-orissa-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Mahammed Saud &amp; Anr vs V on 22 May, 2010 - 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\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mahammed Saud &amp; Anr vs V on 22 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-05-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-06-13T05:51:59+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mahammed Saud &amp; Anr vs V on 22 May, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-05-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-13T05:51:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1803,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Orissa High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010\",\"name\":\"Mahammed Saud &amp; Anr vs V on 22 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-05-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-13T05:51:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mahammed Saud &amp; Anr vs V on 22 May, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Mahammed Saud &amp; Anr vs V on 22 May, 2010 - 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\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mahammed Saud &amp; Anr vs V on 22 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-05-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-06-13T05:51:59+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mahammed Saud &amp; Anr vs V on 22 May, 2010","datePublished":"2010-05-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-13T05:51:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010"},"wordCount":1803,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Orissa High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010","name":"Mahammed Saud &amp; Anr vs V on 22 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-05-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-13T05:51:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mahammed-saud-anr-vs-v-on-22-may-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mahammed Saud &amp; Anr vs V on 22 May, 2010"}]},{"@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\/239459","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=239459"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/239459\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=239459"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=239459"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=239459"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}