{"id":242566,"date":"2009-02-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-02-19T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009"},"modified":"2018-11-06T03:29:58","modified_gmt":"2018-11-05T21:59:58","slug":"sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009","title":{"rendered":"Sanku Thankappan vs Balachandran on 20 February, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Sanku Thankappan vs Balachandran on 20 February, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nSA.No. 402 of 1999(F)\n\n\n\n1. SANKU THANKAPPAN\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. BALACHANDRAN\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.SIBY MATHEW\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.T.I.ABDUL SALAM\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH\n\n Dated :20\/02\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                            THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J.\n                           --------------------------------------\n                                S.A.No.402 of 1999\n                           --------------------------------------\n                    Dated this the 20th day of February, 2009.\n\n                                     JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
       The dispute which is carried into this Second Appeal between           near<\/p>\n
relatives is in respect of the right of respondents to recover 19 cents of land<\/p>\n
which admittedly now is in the possession of the appellant. Respondents 1 to 7,<\/p>\n
9 and 10 are the legal representatives of Sanku Narayanan. Appellant is the<\/p>\n
brother of Sanku Narayanan. The suit property originally belonged to Sanku<\/p>\n
Narayanan as per partition deed No.380 of 1956, a registration copy of which<\/p>\n
was marked in the first appellate court as Ext.A3 on the side of respondents 1 to<\/p>\n
8. According to respondents 1 to 8, Sanku Narayanan along with his parents<\/p>\n
who had      life interest over the suit property assigned it in favour of the<\/p>\n
respondents as per assignment deed No.853 of 1956 dated 2.4.1956 and since<\/p>\n
then, they were in possession and enjoyment of the property paying revenue.<\/p>\n
They produced Ext.A2, receipt dated 6.9.1985 for payment of revenue for the<\/p>\n
suit property for the years 1984-85 and 1985-86. On the premises that they are<\/p>\n
in possession and enjoyment of the said property, they sued the appellant for a<\/p>\n
decree of prohibitory injunction against trespassing into the suit property.<\/p>\n
Respondents 9 and 10 who also had right along with respondents 1 to 7 were<\/p>\n
impleaded as defendants 2 and 3 in the suit. Appellant contended that as per<\/p>\n
Ext.B1, agreement dated 18.10.1978 executed by Sanku Narayanan, the latter<\/p>\n
had agreed to sell the suit property in his favour for consideration and he was put<\/p>\n
SA No.402\/1999<\/p>\n
                                        2<\/span><\/p>\n
in possession and enjoyment of the said property.         In the court below, an<\/p>\n
advocate commissioner was deputed to inspect the property.               Advocate<\/p>\n
commissioner filed Exts.C1 to C3, plan, report and list, respectively.  In the light<\/p>\n
of the report of the advocate commissioner, respondents 1 to 8 got the plaint<\/p>\n
amended as one for recovery of possession on the strength of their title.<\/p>\n
Learned Munsiff found that apart from Ext.A1, respondents 1 to 8 did not<\/p>\n
produce the prior document of title (Ext.A3) and prove the identity of the suit<\/p>\n
property. The suit was dismissed. Respondents 1 to 8 took up the matter in<\/p>\n
appeal. In the appeal the registration copy of the partition deed as per which<\/p>\n
Sanku Narayanan got title and his parents got life interest over the suit property<\/p>\n
was produced by respondents 1 to 8. Since that document is admitted by the<\/p>\n
appellant also,   learned Additional District Judge received the document as<\/p>\n
additional evidence and marked it as Ext.A3. Learned Additional District Judge<\/p>\n
found that boundary descriptions in the A schedule of Ext.A3, A1, the plaint<\/p>\n
schedule and the descriptions given by the advocate commissioner tallied, there<\/p>\n
is no dispute raised by the appellant regarding the identity of the property, found<\/p>\n
that respondents have title over the suit property, that execution of Ext.B1 is not<\/p>\n
proved and at any rate, that cannot be taken into account since by the time<\/p>\n
Ext.B1was allegedly executed, Sanku Narayanan had no right, title or interest<\/p>\n
over suit property and accordingly, granted decree in favour of the respondents<\/p>\n
for recovery of possession. That judgment and decree are under challenge in<\/p>\n
this Second Appeal.\n<\/p>\n
SA No.402\/1999<\/p>\n
                                         3<\/span><\/p>\n
        2.   The substantial questions of law formulated for a decision are –<\/p>\n
whether the first appellate court was right in holding that Sanku Narayanan had<\/p>\n
no subsisting right over the suit property at the time of execution of Ext.B1 and<\/p>\n
whether the first appellate court was correct in holding that execution of Ext.B1<\/p>\n
is not proved and at any rate, did not confer right on the appellant.<\/p>\n
        3.   Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the first appellate<\/p>\n
court ought not to have taken Ext.A3 into account since the case spoken by the<\/p>\n
first respondent as PW1 in the trial court was that the original partition deed is<\/p>\n
lost and hence he is unable to produce the same in which case he could have<\/p>\n
produced atleast the registration copy of the partition deed in the trial court. It<\/p>\n
is also contended by the learned counsel that the finding of the first appellate<\/p>\n
court regarding the execution of Ext.B1 is not correct. Counsel for contesting<\/p>\n
respondents supported the judgment and decree passed by the first appellate<\/p>\n
court.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
        4.   I went through the records of the case.          There is infact no<\/p>\n
contention raised by the appellant in the written statement as to the identity of<\/p>\n
the property. Rather, he also claims that he is in possession of the suit property<\/p>\n
though, according to him as per Ext.B1. Trial court found against the identity of<\/p>\n
the property for the reason that the prior document of title (Ext.A3) referred to in<\/p>\n
Ext.A1 is not produced. Assuming that as a defect, that defect is curred by the<\/p>\n
contesting respondents by producing atleast the registration copy of the partition<\/p>\n
deed in appeal and getting it exhibited in evidence as Ext.A3. Appellant has no<\/p>\n
SA No.402\/1999<\/p>\n
                                          4<\/span><\/p>\n
reason to challenge that as he is also admitting the partition deed and the<\/p>\n
derivation of title in favour of Sanku Narayanan under whom he is claiming<\/p>\n
possessory right as per Ext.B1.       There is no reason why this Court should<\/p>\n
interfere with the finding of the first appellate court that the property is properly<\/p>\n
identified by Exts.A1, A3 and the report and plan prepared by the advocate<\/p>\n
commissioner.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
        5.    So far as Ext.B1 is concerned, it is an unregistered agreement<\/p>\n
dated 18.10.1978 said to be executed by late Sanku Narayanan. As to its<\/p>\n
execution, what is available is only the interested version of the appellant as<\/p>\n
DW1. He did not examine the attestors in Ext.B1. PW1, first respondent denied<\/p>\n
that Ext.B1 was executed by his father, Sanku Narayanan. It is also seen from<\/p>\n
Ext.B1 that on its first page where Sanku Narayanan is said to have subscribed<\/p>\n
his signature, none of the attesting witnesses have signed. The signature of the<\/p>\n
attesting witnesses appear only on the reverse side of the stamp paper and<\/p>\n
unfortunately on that side, the signature of the executent does not figure. There<\/p>\n
is no evidence that the appellant was in possession of the suit property from<\/p>\n
18.1.1978 onwards. It is difficult to think that the appellant would not have<\/p>\n
instituted proper proceedings for transfer of title in his favour, even if Ext.B1 were<\/p>\n
actually executed by late Sanku Narayanan. In the circumstances the contention<\/p>\n
that Ext.B1 was executed by late Sanku Narayanan cannot be accepted.<\/p>\n
SA No.402\/1999<\/p>\n
                                           5<\/span><\/p>\n
        6.    Assuming that Ext.B1 was executed by late Sanku Narayanan, as<\/p>\n
rightly pointed out by the first appellate court, appellant would not got any right or<\/p>\n
interest over the suit property since Ext.A1 shows that as per registered<\/p>\n
assignment deed, Sanku Narayanan along with his parents who had life interest<\/p>\n
over suit property conveyed their right, title, interest and possession in favour of<\/p>\n
respondents on 2.4.1956. If that be so, there was no right subsisting with<\/p>\n
Sanku Narayanan on 18.10.1978 to agree to be conveyed to the appellant as<\/p>\n
per Ext.B1.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
        7.    On going through the judgment of the first appellate court, I do not<\/p>\n
find any reason to interfere with that judgment and the decree that followed.<\/p>\n
        No other point is raised for consideration.\n<\/p>\n
        Second Appeal fails. It is dismissed. Parties are directed to bear their<\/p>\n
respective costs.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
        C.M.P.No.1054 of 1999 will stand dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                                  THOMAS P.JOSEPH,
\n                                                           Judge.\n<\/p>\n
cks<\/p>\n
SA No.402\/1999<\/p>\n
                  6<\/span><\/p>\n
                     Thomas P.Joseph, J.\n<\/p>\n
                     S.A.No.402 of 1999<\/p>\n
                     JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
                     20th February, 2009.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Sanku Thankappan vs Balachandran on 20 February, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM SA.No. 402 of 1999(F) 1. SANKU THANKAPPAN … Petitioner Vs 1. BALACHANDRAN … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.SIBY MATHEW For Respondent :SRI.T.I.ABDUL SALAM The Hon’ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH Dated :20\/02\/2009 O R D E R THOMAS […]<\/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-242566","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSanku Thankappan vs Balachandran on 20 February, 2009 - 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\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sanku Thankappan vs Balachandran on 20 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-02-19T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-11-05T21:59:58+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\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sanku Thankappan vs Balachandran on 20 February, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-05T21:59:58+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1236,\"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\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009\",\"name\":\"Sanku Thankappan vs Balachandran on 20 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-05T21:59:58+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sanku Thankappan vs Balachandran on 20 February, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sanku Thankappan vs Balachandran on 20 February, 2009 - 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\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sanku Thankappan vs Balachandran on 20 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-02-19T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-11-05T21:59:58+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\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sanku Thankappan vs Balachandran on 20 February, 2009","datePublished":"2009-02-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-05T21:59:58+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009"},"wordCount":1236,"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\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009","name":"Sanku Thankappan vs Balachandran on 20 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-02-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-05T21:59:58+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sanku-thankappan-vs-balachandran-on-20-february-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sanku Thankappan vs Balachandran on 20 February, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/242566","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=242566"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/242566\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=242566"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=242566"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=242566"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}