{"id":241461,"date":"2008-11-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-25T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008"},"modified":"2019-04-03T23:57:35","modified_gmt":"2019-04-03T18:27:35","slug":"om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"Om Prakash Marwaha (D) Th. Lrs. & … vs Jagdish Lal Marwaha(D)Thr. Lrs on 26 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Om Prakash Marwaha (D) Th. Lrs. & … vs Jagdish Lal Marwaha(D)Thr. Lrs on 26 November, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: _______________J.<\/div>\n
Bench: Altamas Kabir, Markandey Katju<\/div>\n
                                                                   1\n\n\n              IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA\n\n              CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION\n\n      CIVIL APPEAL NO.6850-6851 ............ of 2008\n                         @\n SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NOs.7099-7100 of 2008\n\n\nOm Prakash Marwaha (D) Thr. LRS. & Ors. Appellants\n\n\nVs.\n\n\nJagdish Lal Marwaha (D) Thr. LRS            ...Respondents\n\n                             With\n\n            Civil Appeal No...6852.. of 2008\n       (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 3856 of 2007)\n\n\n\n                    J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
ALTAMAS KABIR, J.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
1.    Leave   granted   in    both   the   Special   Leave<\/p>\n
      Petitions wherein the parties are the same and<\/p>\n
      both arise out of orders passed by the Delhi<\/p>\n
      High Court in RSA No.126 of 1989.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                          2<\/span><\/p>\n
2.   The      appellants           herein        are      the        legal<\/p>\n
     representatives          of     the       original       defendant,<\/p>\n
     Nanak Chand in a suit brought against him by<\/p>\n
     Jagdish     Lal      Marwaha,          the     predecessor-in-<\/p>\n
     interest of the respondents, to makeover vacant<\/p>\n
     and peaceful possession of quarter No. 37-38,<\/p>\n
     Block      No.C-I,            Malkaganj,           Delhi,        and,<\/p>\n
     thereafter,        not        to      interfere          with        the<\/p>\n
     plaintiff’s       possession          therein.      On    the    suit<\/p>\n
     being    dismissed,       the       plaintiff,       Jagdish         Lal<\/p>\n
     Marwaha, filed a First Appeal in the Court of<\/p>\n
     Additional       District          Judge.    While       the    First<\/p>\n
     Appeal    was     pending,         Nanak    Chand    died       on   3rd<\/p>\n
     January, 1985, and apparently an application<\/p>\n
     for substitution of his legal heirs was made in<\/p>\n
     the     pending     appeal.         The     said     application,<\/p>\n
     however, remained pending and undisposed of,<\/p>\n
     though     the      appeal          was     finally        decided.<\/p>\n
     Consequently, although, an application had been<\/p>\n
     made for substitution, the heirs of deceased,<\/p>\n
     Nanak Chand, were not brought on record in the<\/p>\n
     first appeal and as a result when the decree
\n                                                                 3<\/span><\/p>\n
     was drawn up it was drawn up against Nanak<\/p>\n
     Chand, who, as mentioned hereinabove had died<\/p>\n
     during the pendency of the appeal.<\/p>\n
3.   Although, no formal order of substitution had<\/p>\n
     been made, the legal representatives of Nanak<\/p>\n
     Chand filed a second appeal before the High<\/p>\n
     Court, which was ultimately dismissed on 12th<\/p>\n
     December, 1991, with the judgment and decree of<\/p>\n
     the   First    Appellate      Court      being       affirmed.<\/p>\n
     However,    since     the   legal    heirs      of    deceased<\/p>\n
     Nanak Chand had not been brought on the records<\/p>\n
     of the first appeal, a decree in terms of the<\/p>\n
     judgment    passed     by   the     High   Court      in    the<\/p>\n
     Regular Second Appeal could not be drawn up and<\/p>\n
     as a result, the decree passed by the First<\/p>\n
     Appellate Court and affirmed by the High Court<\/p>\n
     in second appeal could not be executed.                      An<\/p>\n
     application,     being      CM    2873     of    1998,      was<\/p>\n
     thereupon     filed    by   the   legal    heirs       of   the<\/p>\n
     plaintiff decree-holder in the second appeal<\/p>\n
     praying for rectification of the judgment and
\n                                                                   4<\/span><\/p>\n
     decree drawn up by the First Appellate Court or<\/p>\n
     in the alternative to draw-up a fresh decree in<\/p>\n
     the second appeal in terms of the order dated<\/p>\n
     12th December, 1991, dismissing the appeal.<\/p>\n
4.   The aforesaid application was strongly opposed<\/p>\n
     on behalf of the respondents on the ground of<\/p>\n
     maintainability.        It     was    alleged        that    the<\/p>\n
     applicants    had      no    locus   standi     to    file    an<\/p>\n
     application,      as    they     were    not     the        legal<\/p>\n
     representatives of the plaintiff, Jagdish Lal<\/p>\n
     Marwaha.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
5.   The aforesaid submission did not find favour<\/p>\n
     with the High Court since by an order dated<\/p>\n
     23rd January, 2004, they had been substituted<\/p>\n
     in place of the original plaintiff, Jagdish Lal<\/p>\n
     Marwaha      as     his       legal     representatives.<\/p>\n
     Furthermore, when the appeal was dismissed on<\/p>\n
     12th December, 1991, they were parties to the<\/p>\n
     appeal.       The      application      was,     therefore,<\/p>\n
     allowed with a direction upon the Registry of
\n                                                                     5<\/span><\/p>\n
     the High Court to draw up the decree in the<\/p>\n
     second     appeal    mentioning       the        names    of    the<\/p>\n
     parties of the appeal at the time the same was<\/p>\n
     finally disposed of.              The said order is the<\/p>\n
     subject matter of challenge in SLP(C) No.3856<\/p>\n
     of 2007, which is being heard along with SLP(C)<\/p>\n
     No. 7099-7100 of 2008.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
6.   At this juncture, it may be stated that two<\/p>\n
     applications,       being    CM    Nos.   584      and    585   of<\/p>\n
     2003, were filed by the legal representatives<\/p>\n
     of Jagdish Lal Marwaha, the plaintiff in the<\/p>\n
     suit, for bringing them on record as the legal<\/p>\n
     representatives of the deceased plaintiff and<\/p>\n
     for   condonation       of        delay     in     making       the<\/p>\n
     application.        It was sought to be explained<\/p>\n
     that since an application had already been made<\/p>\n
     under Order 22 Rule 3 read with Section 151 of<\/p>\n
     the Code of Civil Procedure, on which no order<\/p>\n
     had   been    passed,       the     applicants          had    been<\/p>\n
     advised that they were not required to file a<\/p>\n
     separate     application      for     the        same    purpose.
\n                                                         6<\/span><\/p>\n
     Accepting the explanation, the Delhi High Court<\/p>\n
     allowed both the applications and directed the<\/p>\n
     Memo of Parties to be amended accordingly.          SLP<\/p>\n
     (C) Nos. 7099-7100 of 2008 was filed against<\/p>\n
     the said order of the High Court.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
7.   Appearing    for   the     appellants,   Mr.   Hasnain,<\/p>\n
     learned advocate, urged that once the second<\/p>\n
     appeal had been disposed of, it was no longer<\/p>\n
     open to the High Court to entertain the several<\/p>\n
     applications       filed     on    behalf      of   the<\/p>\n
     plaintiffs\/respondents to allow the heirs of<\/p>\n
     the deceased-plaintiff to rectify the cause-<\/p>\n
     title   of   the    said     appeal.     Mr.    Hasnain<\/p>\n
     submitted that when the first appeal filed by<\/p>\n
     the plaintiff had been allowed and the judgment<\/p>\n
     of dismissal of the suit had been reversed,<\/p>\n
     and, thereafter, confirmed in second appeal and<\/p>\n
     the review therefrom had been dismissed, it was<\/p>\n
     no longer within the jurisdiction of the High<\/p>\n
     Court to allow the decree of the first appeal
\n                                                               7<\/span><\/p>\n
     to be amended when the same had been drawn up<\/p>\n
     against a dead man.\n<\/p>\n
8.   Mr.     Hasnain     submitted    that     the    procedure<\/p>\n
     adopted by the High Court was not in consonance<\/p>\n
     with law and legal procedures and the orders<\/p>\n
     impugned therein were, therefore, liable to be<\/p>\n
     set aside.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
9.   Appearing     for     the    respondents,       Mr.     Iyer,<\/p>\n
     learned      senior      advocate,      submitted        that<\/p>\n
     undoubtedly the suit filed by the predecessor-<\/p>\n
     in-interest of the respondent was decreed in<\/p>\n
     the First Appeal.           The said decree was also<\/p>\n
     confirmed by the High Court in Second Appeal.<\/p>\n
     Learned counsel submitted that apart form the<\/p>\n
     above, an application had been duly made by the<\/p>\n
     plaintiff    for      substitution   of    the    deceased<\/p>\n
     defendant, but through inadvertence no order<\/p>\n
     had been passed thereupon and the decree came<\/p>\n
     to be drawn up against Nanak Chand,                   who had<\/p>\n
     died.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                           8<\/span><\/p>\n
10. Mr.       Iyer       submitted     that       since       the    default<\/p>\n
      leading to the passing of the decree against a<\/p>\n
      dead person was not wholly on account of any<\/p>\n
      negligence on the part of the plaintiff or his<\/p>\n
      legal heirs, they should not be made to suffer<\/p>\n
      on account of such technicality and there was,<\/p>\n
      therefore,          no   reason          for     this     Court       to<\/p>\n
      intervene in the matter under Article 136 of<\/p>\n
      the Constitution.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
11.   In support of his submission, Mr. Iyer firstly<\/p>\n
      referred to a decision of a Three-Judge Bench<\/p>\n
      of this Court in Jang Singh vs. Brij Lal, [AIR<\/p>\n
      1966 SC 1631] wherein this Court                         was called<\/p>\n
      upon    to     consider      whether        a    litigant       should<\/p>\n
      suffer       on    account     of    the       lapse    made    by    an<\/p>\n
      officer of the Court.               Applying the well known<\/p>\n
      maxim, actus curiae neminem gravabit – that<\/p>\n
      an     act    of    Court      should      do     no    harm    to       a<\/p>\n
      litigant,         this   Court      held        that    the    mistake<\/p>\n
      should       be    rectified        by     the    Court       and    the<\/p>\n
      parties relegated to the position on the date
\n                                                                        9<\/span><\/p>\n
    when    the    mistake          occurred.         Mr.     Iyer     also<\/p>\n
    referred to the decision of this Court in N.<\/p>\n
    Suriyakala         vs.    A.       Mohandoss,     [2007      (9)    SCC<\/p>\n
    1960]    where,          in    considering        the    scope      and<\/p>\n
    object of Article 136 of the Constitution, it<\/p>\n
    was    explained         that      the    same    was    a   residual<\/p>\n
    provision which enabled this Court to interfere<\/p>\n
    with the judgment and order of any Court or<\/p>\n
    Tribunal in India in its discretion.                            Laying<\/p>\n
    emphasis      on    the       phrase      “in    its    discretion”,<\/p>\n
    this Court held that jurisdiction under Article<\/p>\n
    136 was meant to deal with important issues and<\/p>\n
    to deal with important questions relating to<\/p>\n
    the    Constitution           or    the    law    or    where    grave<\/p>\n
    injustice had been done.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
12. Mr. Iyer submitted that this was not a case<\/p>\n
    which called for any interference by this Court<\/p>\n
    under Article 136 of the Constitution.<\/p>\n
13. Having     carefully           considered        the    submissions<\/p>\n
    made on behalf of the respective parties, we
\n                                                              10<\/span><\/p>\n
are also inclined to hold that the facts of<\/p>\n
this case do not warrant any interference with<\/p>\n
the    orders    impugned     in    these       two    appeals.<\/p>\n
Admittedly,      the   original          defendant,         Nanak<\/p>\n
Chand,    had   died   during      the    pendency      of   the<\/p>\n
First Appeal, but it is equally important that<\/p>\n
an application for substitution of his legal<\/p>\n
heirs had been made though no order has been<\/p>\n
passed thereupon and a decree was consequently<\/p>\n
drawn up against the original defendant who had<\/p>\n
already    expired.         The    legal       heirs   of    the<\/p>\n
plaintiff had brought the fact of the death of<\/p>\n
the sole defendant to the notice of the Court,<\/p>\n
but it is through sheer inadvertence that the<\/p>\n
substitution was not effected.              However, in the<\/p>\n
Second Appeal, the legal representatives of the<\/p>\n
original plaintiff, Jagdish Lal Marwaha, were<\/p>\n
make   parties    by   the    heirs       of    the    deceased<\/p>\n
defendant, Nanak Chand, who are the appellants<\/p>\n
herein.    The heirs of both the plaintiffs and<\/p>\n
the      defendants      were,           therefore,          duly<\/p>\n
represented before the High Court in the Second
\n                                                        11<\/span><\/p>\n
    Appeal   and   it   is   essentially   a   technicality<\/p>\n
    which has prevented the heirs of the plaintiff<\/p>\n
    from enjoying the benefits of the decree passed<\/p>\n
    in favour of the plaintiff.\n<\/p>\n
14. We are convinced that this is a fit case where<\/p>\n
    applying the above-mentioned maxim, this Court<\/p>\n
    should not interfere with the orders passed by<\/p>\n
    the High Court.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
15. We, accordingly, dismiss both the appeals but<\/p>\n
    without any orders as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                       _______________J.\n<\/p>\n
                                           (ALTAMAS KABIR)<\/p>\n
                                       _______________J.\n<\/p>\n
                                       (MARKANDEY KATJU)<\/p>\n
 New Delhi
\n Dated: 26.11.2008<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Om Prakash Marwaha (D) Th. Lrs. & … vs Jagdish Lal Marwaha(D)Thr. Lrs on 26 November, 2008 Author: _______________J. Bench: Altamas Kabir, Markandey Katju 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.6850-6851 ………… of 2008 @ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NOs.7099-7100 of 2008 Om Prakash Marwaha […]<\/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-241461","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nOm Prakash Marwaha (D) Th. Lrs. & ... vs Jagdish Lal Marwaha(D)Thr. Lrs on 26 November, 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\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Om Prakash Marwaha (D) Th. Lrs. & ... vs Jagdish Lal Marwaha(D)Thr. Lrs on 26 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-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=\"2008-11-25T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-04-03T18:27:35+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\\\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Om Prakash Marwaha (D) Th. Lrs. & … vs Jagdish Lal Marwaha(D)Thr. Lrs on 26 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-03T18:27:35+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1508,\"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\\\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008\",\"name\":\"Om Prakash Marwaha (D) Th. Lrs. & ... vs Jagdish Lal Marwaha(D)Thr. Lrs on 26 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-03T18:27:35+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Om Prakash Marwaha (D) Th. Lrs. & … vs Jagdish Lal Marwaha(D)Thr. Lrs on 26 November, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"Om Prakash Marwaha (D) Th. Lrs. & ... vs Jagdish Lal Marwaha(D)Thr. Lrs on 26 November, 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\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Om Prakash Marwaha (D) Th. Lrs. & ... vs Jagdish Lal Marwaha(D)Thr. Lrs on 26 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-25T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-04-03T18:27:35+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\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Om Prakash Marwaha (D) Th. Lrs. & … vs Jagdish Lal Marwaha(D)Thr. Lrs on 26 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-03T18:27:35+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008"},"wordCount":1508,"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\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008","name":"Om Prakash Marwaha (D) Th. Lrs. & ... vs Jagdish Lal Marwaha(D)Thr. Lrs on 26 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-03T18:27:35+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/om-prakash-marwaha-d-th-lrs-vs-jagdish-lal-marwahadthr-lrs-on-26-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Om Prakash Marwaha (D) Th. Lrs. & … vs Jagdish Lal Marwaha(D)Thr. Lrs on 26 November, 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:\/\/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\/241461","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=241461"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/241461\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=241461"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=241461"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=241461"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}