{"id":242151,"date":"2008-08-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008"},"modified":"2017-08-31T00:29:52","modified_gmt":"2017-08-30T18:59:52","slug":"manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"Manubhai vs Suryaben on 28 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Manubhai vs Suryaben on 28 August, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Akil Kureshi,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/9242\/2008\t 5\/ 5\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 9242 of 2008\n \n\n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nMANUBHAI\nDHARABHAI BHARWAD - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSURYABEN\nSHANTILAL VADVALA &amp; 11 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nSHITAL R PATEL for\nPetitioner(s) : 1, \nNone for Respondent(s) : 1, \nMR PRASAD N\nBHATT for Respondent(s) : 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4,1.2.5  \nRULE\nSERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 2 - 8. \nMR SATYAM CHHAYA ASST\nGOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) :\n7, \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 28\/08\/2008 \n\n \n\n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>\tHeard<br \/>\nlearned advocates appearing for the parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe<br \/>\npetitioner has challenged the order dated 01.07.2008 passed by the<br \/>\nGujarat Revenue Tribunal in Revision Application No.TEN\/BA\/548 of<br \/>\n1995. The petitioner had initiated the proceedings under Section<br \/>\n70(B) of the Bombay<br \/>\nTenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (for short ?Sthe Tenancy<br \/>\nAct??) before the Mamlatdar &amp; ALT claiming to be tenant of the<br \/>\nland bearing Block No.29 admeasuring Acre 1 ?  13 Gunthas and Block<br \/>\nNo.248 admeasuring Acre 2 ?  12 Gunthas of village Hebatpura, Taluka<br \/>\nDaskroi. In the application, the petitioner has stated before the<br \/>\nMamlatdar that he is cultivating the said land since 20 years and he<br \/>\nis also paying the land revenue for the land in question. His tenancy<br \/>\nrights may, therefore, be decided and he may be declared deemed<br \/>\npurchaser of the land in question. Significantly, in the application<br \/>\ndated 11.07.1994 the petitioner filed before the Mamlatdar, he did<br \/>\nnot disclose as to how he was put in possession of the land in<br \/>\nquestion and in what capacity he was cultivating the same.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tThe<br \/>\nMamlatdar held inquiry and after recording evidence, by his order<br \/>\ndated 08.05.1995, held that the petitioner was tenant of the suit<br \/>\nland. He also fixed purchase price and upon payment of which, the<br \/>\npetitioner would become deemed purchaser.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tThe<br \/>\norder of the Mamlatdar was carried in appeal by the land owners<br \/>\nbefore the Deputy Collector. The appeal was, however, came to be<br \/>\ndismissed by his order dated 30.09.1995. Thereupon, the land owners<br \/>\npreferred revision application before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal<br \/>\nwhich by the impugned order, came to be allowed. The petitioner is,<br \/>\ntherefore, before this Court in the present petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tLearned<br \/>\nadvocate Mr.Shital R. Patel has relied upon several factors referred<br \/>\nto in the revision application. It is observed in the impugned order<br \/>\nthat notices were not served on the land owners. That there was no<br \/>\nmaterial to show that the petitioner was tenant of the suit land. It<br \/>\nwas held that the application under Section 70(O) of the Tenancy Act<br \/>\nwas not maintainable.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tHaving<br \/>\nheard learned advocates appearing for the parties and having perused<br \/>\nthe evidence on record, I find that the order of the Gujarat Revenue<br \/>\nTribunal does not call for any interference. Learned advocate<br \/>\nMr.Shital Patel for the petitioner though he is justified in pointing<br \/>\nout that the Tribunal held that proper notices were not served on the<br \/>\nland owners and under such circumstances, the proper course would be<br \/>\nto remand the proceedings. However, this is not only a ground on<br \/>\nwhich the revision application was allowed. The Tribunal found that<br \/>\nthe petitioner had failed to establish his tenancy rights. To this<br \/>\nconclusion, I am in agreement with finding of the Tribunal. The<br \/>\nrespondents have produced the application filed by the petitioner<br \/>\nbefore the Mamlatdar and the depositions of the parties. The<br \/>\npetitioner himself in his deposition has stated before the Mamlatdar<br \/>\nthat he is cultivating the land since 20 years. That the land is in<br \/>\nthe name of widow of Ratilal Ganpatram viz. Parvatiben but the land<br \/>\nowners are not residing in the village since many years, where they<br \/>\nare residing the witness does not know. The petitioner further stated<br \/>\nthat he cultivates the land and enjoys possession in absence of the<br \/>\nland owners who are not residing in the village, nor are cultivating<br \/>\nthe land. He stated that he should be declared as tenant and purchase<br \/>\nprice for the land should be fixed. Witnesses examined on behalf of<br \/>\nthe petitioner also gave similar depositions. One Kalaji Chanduji<br \/>\nThakor who was examined by the petitioner. He also stated that the<br \/>\nland owners do not reside in the village and he did not know where<br \/>\nthey are residing. One Pravinbhai Mavjibhai also similarly examined<br \/>\nby the petitioner who also gave similar deposition.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tFrom<br \/>\nthe evidence on record, it becomes clear that though the petitioner<br \/>\nasserted before the revenue courts that he is in actual possession of<br \/>\nthe land in question and that he cultivates the land since years,<br \/>\nnowhere the petitioner stated that he was put in possession by the<br \/>\nland owners or he was authorised by the land owners to cultivate the<br \/>\nland or that in any manner the petitioner cultivates the land upon<br \/>\nsharing the crop or by paying any other rent to the land owners. In<br \/>\neffect, the case of the petitioner himself that he was in possession<br \/>\nof the land and cultivating the same since years. He, in fact, stated<br \/>\nthat he does not know where the land owners reside. Nowhere did the<br \/>\npetitioner contend that he was cultivating the land as tenant. This<br \/>\ncrucial aspect was totally missing in the application of the<br \/>\npetitioner as well as in his deposition, so also, of the depositions<br \/>\nof other witnesses.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tIn<br \/>\nthat view of the matter, even if the Courts  below were of the<br \/>\nopinion that the petitioner was actually cultivating the land, it was<br \/>\nnot possible to hold that he was doing so as tenant. It is true that<br \/>\nthe Deputy Collector may have passed remark that the petitioner<br \/>\nconceal tenant. However, there was no material come on record to such<br \/>\nconclusion, nor  it was not even a case of the petitioner himself.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tWhen<br \/>\nthe petitioner himself has not set out a case of cultivating the land<br \/>\nas tenant, the Mamlatdar as well as Deputy Collector could not have<br \/>\ndeclared the petitioner as tenant of the suit land. The Revenue<br \/>\nTribunal, therefore, not committed any error in reversing such<br \/>\norders.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn<br \/>\nthe result, the petition fails, and hereby, dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tLearned<br \/>\nadvocate for the petitioner, however, pointed out that the land<br \/>\nowners have obtained a decree from the Civil Court against which the<br \/>\npetitioner has preferred an appeal which is pending.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tI<br \/>\nam sure such an appeal will be decided on the basis of material<br \/>\navailable on record.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tSubject<br \/>\nto aforesaid observations, the petition is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tRule<br \/>\nis discharged.\n<\/p>\n<p>(<br \/>\nAkil Kureshi, J. )<\/p>\n<p>kailash<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Manubhai vs Suryaben on 28 August, 2008 Author: Akil Kureshi,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/9242\/2008 5\/ 5 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9242 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may [&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":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-242151","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Manubhai vs Suryaben on 28 August, 2008 - 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\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Manubhai vs Suryaben on 28 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-08-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-08-30T18:59:52+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Manubhai vs Suryaben on 28 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-30T18:59:52+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":994,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008\",\"name\":\"Manubhai vs Suryaben on 28 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-30T18:59:52+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Manubhai vs Suryaben on 28 August, 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":"Manubhai vs Suryaben on 28 August, 2008 - 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\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Manubhai vs Suryaben on 28 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-08-30T18:59:52+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Manubhai vs Suryaben on 28 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-30T18:59:52+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008"},"wordCount":994,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008","name":"Manubhai vs Suryaben on 28 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-30T18:59:52+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manubhai-vs-suryaben-on-28-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Manubhai vs Suryaben on 28 August, 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\/242151","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=242151"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/242151\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=242151"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=242151"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=242151"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}