{"id":242242,"date":"2010-02-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010"},"modified":"2016-09-09T18:20:06","modified_gmt":"2016-09-09T12:50:06","slug":"state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"State Of Kerala vs P. Hariharan on 22 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
State Of Kerala vs P. Hariharan on 22 February, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nLA.App..No. 136 of 2008()\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. P. HARIHARAN,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE SECRETARY,\n\n                For Petitioner  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.SUBHASH CYRIAC\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM\n\n Dated :22\/02\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n            PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JJ.\n            ------------------------------------------------\n               LAA. NO. 136,253 of 2008 & 654\/2009\n            -------------------------------------------------\n         Dated this the 22nd         day of February, 2010\n\n                              JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
Pius C.Kuriakose,J.\n<\/p>\n
          LAA.No.136\/2008<\/p>\n
          Government is in appeal. The property was situated in<\/p>\n
Vanchiyoor Village very close to the Connemara market at<\/p>\n
Palayam. The acquisition was for the purpose of DTP Scheme<\/p>\n
Sub Center at Palayam for TRIDA. The relevant section 4(1)<\/p>\n
notification was published on 19.12.2000. The Land Acquisition<\/p>\n
Officer relied on basis documents and fixed the market value of<\/p>\n
the land at Rs.2,22,300\/- per cent. Before the Reference Court<\/p>\n
the evidence consisted of Ext.A1 sale deed and Ext.A2 judgment<\/p>\n
apart from the oral evidence of AW1 the claimant.           On the side<\/p>\n
of the Government and the requisitioning authority the same<\/p>\n
consisted only of papers pertaining to the award file. Ext. R1 was<\/p>\n
the mahazar.      Ext.R2 was the plan pertaining to the acquired<\/p>\n
property. Importantly there was no counter oral evidence at all<\/p>\n
to the evidence adduced by             AW1 from the side of the<\/p>\n
LAA. 136\/2008 & conn.cases.            2<\/span><\/p>\n
Government or the requisitioning authority.      Ext.A1 sale deed<\/p>\n
was in respect of property in the same village. But according to<\/p>\n
the finding of the learned Subordinate Judge the property is<\/p>\n
situated in an area of much lessor importance. Ext.A1 property<\/p>\n
did not have direct frontage of any main road. This is clear from<\/p>\n
not only the judgment impugned but also from a perusal of<\/p>\n
Ext.A1.    Ext.A1 reflected a land value of Rs.7,15,000\/- per cent<\/p>\n
as on 11.4.1997. Ext.A2 was the judgment of the same court<\/p>\n
pertaining to acquisition of land in Thycaud Village but situated<\/p>\n
at a distance of 1 =          k.m. away from the property under<\/p>\n
acquisition and the same was acquired pursuant to a notification<\/p>\n
dated 14.5.1997.          Ext.A2 reflected refixed land value of<\/p>\n
Rs.17,31,306\/- per Are.       AW1 gave evidence to the effect that<\/p>\n
the property under acquisition was superior to the properties<\/p>\n
under Exts.A1 and A2.           AW1 was cross examined by the<\/p>\n
Government Pleader. On going through the cross examination of<\/p>\n
AW1 what we notice is that his version regarding comparability of<\/p>\n
Ext.A2 property with the property under acquisition is not<\/p>\n
seriously challenged. In fact the specific challenge is only that<\/p>\n
Ext.A2 is acquired       pursuant to a different publication under<\/p>\n
LAA. 136\/2008 & conn.cases.          3<\/span><\/p>\n
section 4(1) notification. But in the case of Ext.A1 there is a<\/p>\n
specific suggestion that the claimant is not entitled for getting the<\/p>\n
value in Ext.A1. The learned Subordinate Judge has discussed<\/p>\n
Ext.A1 as well as the judgments of this court in Hindustan O.C.<\/p>\n
Ltd., vs. Damodaran Namboothiri and others (1986 KLT 1013)<\/p>\n
and State of Kerala vs. Dr.Susheela Varghese and others<\/a> (1999<\/p>\n
(3) ILR 585) which were cited by the claimant to support their<\/p>\n
claim based on Ext.A1. Ext.A2 is also similar discussion and it is<\/p>\n
observed that the commercial importance of the property covered<\/p>\n
by Ext.A2 and the property under acquisition is similar. There is<\/p>\n
a specific finding that Ext.A2 judgment is relevant.       A careful<\/p>\n
reading of the impugned judgment will show that the learned<\/p>\n
Subordinate Judge has kept in mind both Exts.A1 and A2 and<\/p>\n
refixed the market value of the land at Rs.22,50,698\/- per Are by<\/p>\n
adding 30% over the value reflected in Exts.A1 and A2 for the<\/p>\n
passage of time which is more than three years.\n<\/p>\n
            2. We have heard Sri.A.V.Ramanand, senior counsel<\/p>\n
who was assisted by Smt.Latha T.Thankappan in all the<\/p>\n
submissions.     According to Mr.Ramamnath, under Ext.A2 the<\/p>\n
percentage of enhancement given by the court below is 30%<\/p>\n
LAA. 136\/2008 & conn.cases.          4<\/span><\/p>\n
whereas the percentage of enhancement in this case is much<\/p>\n
higher than the percentage given under Ext.A2.       The claimant<\/p>\n
did not take out a commission so that there is a convincing<\/p>\n
report regarding the comparability of Ext.A2 and the acquired<\/p>\n
property.    The matter may be remitted to the court below if<\/p>\n
necessary giving opportunity to the claimant for taking out a<\/p>\n
commission.     All the submissions of the learned Government<\/p>\n
Pleader were resisted by the Sri.Subhash Syriac, learned counsel<\/p>\n
for the claimant as well as the counsel Sri.J.Harikumar who<\/p>\n
appears for the claimant in LAA.No.253\/2008 and LAA. 654\/2009<\/p>\n
which are decided separately. According to them, the relevant<\/p>\n
considerations are kept in mind while deciding the correct market<\/p>\n
value. In the instant case it was a low price that was awarded by<\/p>\n
the Land Acquisition Officer and that is why in refixation the<\/p>\n
claimants got much higher percentage than the percentage of<\/p>\n
enhancement received by the parties in Ext.A2. Our attention<\/p>\n
was drawn by the learned counsel for the respondents to the<\/p>\n
findings entered by the learned Subordinate Judge under the<\/p>\n
impugned judgment as well as to the mahazar prepared by the<\/p>\n
Land Acquisition Officer.    Learned counsel submitted that the<\/p>\n
LAA. 136\/2008 & conn.cases.           5<\/span><\/p>\n
property under acquisition was situated in an area which can be<\/p>\n
described as the commercial heart area.         The acquisition was<\/p>\n
towards the end of 2000 and the actual market value of the<\/p>\n
property at that time was much more than the rate which is now<\/p>\n
fixed. There was no counter oral evidence on the side of the<\/p>\n
Government or the requisitioning authority. There is no warrant<\/p>\n
for interference.\n<\/p>\n
            3.    We have gone through the entire records<\/p>\n
particularly the mahazar. It is true that the claimant did not take<\/p>\n
out a commission. But then the comparability between the two<\/p>\n
properties were spoken to by AW1 whose evidence inspired the<\/p>\n
mind of the learned Subordinate Judge. We are also convinced on<\/p>\n
going through the mahazar and the recitals in Ext.A1 and the<\/p>\n
details given in Ext.A2 that the property under acquisition was<\/p>\n
superior to the property covered by Ext.A1 and atleast compared<\/p>\n
equally with the property under Ext.A2. The suggestion of the<\/p>\n
Government Pleader in cross examination of AW1 was only that<\/p>\n
the party claimant is not entitled for getting the value paid under<\/p>\n
Ext.A1. No similar suggestion is not made in respect of Ext.A2 in<\/p>\n
the cross examination of AW1. We are not impressed with the<\/p>\n
LAA. 136\/2008 & conn.cases.          6<\/span><\/p>\n
argument of the learned Government Pleader based on the<\/p>\n
percentage of enhancement.      We do not find any warrant for<\/p>\n
interference . The appeal is dismissed. No costs.<\/p>\n
         LAA.Nos.253\/2008 & 654\/2009<\/p>\n
          We are of the view that in view of the decision taken in<\/p>\n
LAA.No.136\/2008 these appeals are also to be dismissed. We<\/p>\n
dismiss these appeals but without any order as to costs.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n\n                                PIUS C. KURIAKOSE ,JUDGE\n\n\n\n\n                                C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE\n\n\npmn\/\n\nLAA. 136\/2008 & conn.cases.    7\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court State Of Kerala vs P. Hariharan on 22 February, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM LA.App..No. 136 of 2008() 1. STATE OF KERALA, … Petitioner Vs 1. P. HARIHARAN, … Respondent 2. THE SECRETARY, For Petitioner :GOVERNMENT PLEADER For Respondent :SRI.SUBHASH CYRIAC The Hon’ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE The […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-242242","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nState Of Kerala vs P. Hariharan on 22 February, 2010 - 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\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Of Kerala vs P. Hariharan on 22 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-09-09T12:50:06+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\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Of Kerala vs P. Hariharan on 22 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-09T12:50:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1087,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010\",\"name\":\"State Of Kerala vs P. Hariharan on 22 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-09T12:50:06+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Of Kerala vs P. Hariharan on 22 February, 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:\/\/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":"State Of Kerala vs P. Hariharan on 22 February, 2010 - 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\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Of Kerala vs P. Hariharan on 22 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-09-09T12:50:06+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\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Of Kerala vs P. Hariharan on 22 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-09T12:50:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010"},"wordCount":1087,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010","name":"State Of Kerala vs P. Hariharan on 22 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-09T12:50:06+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-kerala-vs-p-hariharan-on-22-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Of Kerala vs P. Hariharan on 22 February, 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:\/\/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\/242242","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=242242"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/242242\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=242242"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=242242"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=242242"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}