{"id":243677,"date":"2008-11-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-25T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008"},"modified":"2015-12-16T04:33:08","modified_gmt":"2015-12-15T23:03:08","slug":"n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"N.Gnanapandithan vs K.Venkatachalam on 26 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">N.Gnanapandithan vs K.Venkatachalam on 26 November, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 26\/11\/2008\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.PALANIVELU\n\nC.R.P(PD)(MD)NO.459 of 2008\nand\nM.P.(MD)NO.1 of 2008\n\nN.Gnanapandithan\t       ...Petitioner\/petitioner\/\n                                              defendant\n\t\t\nvs\n\nK.Venkatachalam\t       ...Respondent\/Respondent\/\n\t\t\t\t               plaintiff\n\nPRAYER\n\nCivil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure\nCode, praying to set aside the fair order and decreetal order made in I.A.No.274\nof 2007 in O.S.No.26 of 2006, dated 12.02.2008, on the file of the Subordinate\nCourt, Devakkottai.\n\n!For Petitioner  ... Mr.D.Venkatesh\n^For Respondent  ... Mr.R.Sundar Srinivasan\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tThe petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.26 of 2006, on the file of the<br \/>\nSub-Court, Devakkottai. The respondent filed a suit for recovery of money from<br \/>\nthe petitioner based on a pronote.  On 21.08.2006, the defendant was called<br \/>\nabsent for non-filing of the written statement and he was set exparte.  He filed<br \/>\na petition to set aside the exparte decree along with a petition to condone the<br \/>\ndelay of 87 days in filing the petition to set aside the exparte decree, under<br \/>\nSection 5 of the Limitation Act, alleging that since he was indisposed, he was<br \/>\nunable to meet his counsel to give instructions. It is further contended that as<br \/>\nhe got intestinal problem and backpain, he could not walk and he stayed in<br \/>\nMadurai for taking treatment and hence the above said delay has been caused.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2.  In the counter, the allegations found in the affidavit are denied and<br \/>\nthat inspite of sufficient opportunities, he has not utilized the same and filed<br \/>\nhis written statement.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3.  After hearing both sides, the learned Subordinate Judge, Devakkottai,<br \/>\npassed a conditional  order allowing the application on deposit of 50% of the<br \/>\ndecree amount.  The said order is challenged before this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4.  The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the condition<br \/>\nimposed by the court below is onerous one and it is not in accordance with law.<br \/>\nIn support of his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner draws<br \/>\nattention of this Court to a decision in K.Palaniswamy .vs. M\/s. Ganesa Finance<br \/>\nCorporation, Erode, represented by Managing Partner, L.Selvarasu reported in<br \/>\n(2001) 2 MLJ 654, in which it is stated as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8221; The trial Court was under the wrong  impression that I.A.No.1187 of 2000<br \/>\nis an application to set aside the ex parte decree.  In the above circumstances,<br \/>\nI have no hesitation in holding that the trial Court has committed material<br \/>\nirregularity in imposing condition in the application to condone the delay.<br \/>\nFurther, the condition directing the petitioner to deposit 50% of the suit claim<br \/>\nis onerous.  I hold that it is proper to impose nominal cost for condoning the<br \/>\ndelay.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>It is his further contention that it is not open to the trial court to impose<br \/>\nonerous condition, when he comes forward with sufficient cause, explaining the<br \/>\ndelay.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. Conversely, the learned counsel for the respondent would submit that<br \/>\nthere is no legal flaw on the part of  the court below by imposing such<br \/>\ncondition  as per the decision of this Court.  He placed reliance upon a<br \/>\ndecision of this Court in M\/s. Vasantha Mills Ltd., represented by its Chairman<br \/>\nK.C.Palanisamy .vs. M\/s. K.S.R.Exports, represented by its Partner R.Asaithambi<br \/>\nreported in 2002-2-L.W.555 in which  it is observed that the conduct  of the<br \/>\npetitioner is nothing  but to protract the proceedings and the lower court had<br \/>\ncarefully taken into consideration the same, while imposing the condition<br \/>\ndirecting the petitioner   to deposit 50% of the decree amount.  The learned<br \/>\ncounsel for the respondent  also cited another decision of this Court<br \/>\nK.M.Palanisamy .vs. P.Sengottaiyan reported in 2007(4)CTC 148 in which the<br \/>\nLearned Judge  has observed that the order of trial court  imposing condition on<br \/>\nthe defendant to deposit Rs.50,000\/- into court in order to allow petition to<br \/>\nset aside is not onerous order fixing ex parte hearing of suit or prejudging<br \/>\ncontroversy in suit but only reasonable and just.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. The learned counsel for the petitioner distinquishes the occasions<br \/>\nwherein the consideration under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and another is<br \/>\nas to the setting aside of the exparte decree.  As far as the first category is<br \/>\nconcerned, as per settled procedure, the petitioner is expected to show<br \/>\nsufficient cause for the delay and the court has to get satisfied itself<br \/>\nwhether the reasons adduced in the affidavit for his delay have been<br \/>\nsufficiently explained.  In so far as the next category is concerned, it is for<br \/>\nthe court to impose reasonable conditions but not onerous.  As for this case,<br \/>\nthis is a petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and the court has to<br \/>\nsee whether the reasons have been properly explained.  It is the version of the<br \/>\npetitioner that because of his intestinal troubles and backpain, he was unable<br \/>\nto walk and he being stayed at Madurai for taking treatment.  It is stated by<br \/>\nthe court below that no document has been produced to show that he was suffering<br \/>\nfrom the specific illness  and further he had not examined any Doctor to prove<br \/>\nhis illness.  However, the court below has finally decided that the delay has<br \/>\nbeen explained.  As far as this finding recorded by the court below is<br \/>\nconcerned, there is no need to disturb it.  While coming to the imposition of<br \/>\ncondition, it appears to this Court that it is onerous.  As adverted supra, on a<br \/>\npetition under Order 9 Rule 13 of C.P.C, there may be some condition for deposit<br \/>\nof a portion of the decree amount,  which could not be<br \/>\nonerous but a reasonable one.  Since sufficient cause has been shown on behalf<br \/>\nof the petitioner, ends of justice would be met by imposing costs so as to<br \/>\ncompensate the other side  for inconvenience.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7.  In fine, the Civil Revision Petition will be allowed on condition that<br \/>\nthe petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs.1,000\/-(Rupees one thousand only) to the<br \/>\nrespondent towards costs within a period of two weeks from today before the<br \/>\nlower court and in default of payment, this Civil Revision Petition shall stand<br \/>\nautomatically dismissed without reference to this Court. Consequently, connected<br \/>\nMiscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>vsn<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>The Subordinate Judge,<br \/>\nDevakkottai.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court N.Gnanapandithan vs K.Venkatachalam on 26 November, 2008 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 26\/11\/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.PALANIVELU C.R.P(PD)(MD)NO.459 of 2008 and M.P.(MD)NO.1 of 2008 N.Gnanapandithan &#8230;Petitioner\/petitioner\/ defendant vs K.Venkatachalam &#8230;Respondent\/Respondent\/ plaintiff PRAYER Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code, praying to [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-243677","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>N.Gnanapandithan vs K.Venkatachalam on 26 November, 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\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-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=\"N.Gnanapandithan vs K.Venkatachalam on 26 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-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=\"2008-11-25T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-12-15T23:03:08+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"N.Gnanapandithan vs K.Venkatachalam on 26 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-15T23:03:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":953,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008\",\"name\":\"N.Gnanapandithan vs K.Venkatachalam on 26 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-15T23:03:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"N.Gnanapandithan vs K.Venkatachalam 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":"N.Gnanapandithan vs K.Venkatachalam on 26 November, 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\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"N.Gnanapandithan vs K.Venkatachalam on 26 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-25T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-12-15T23:03:08+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"N.Gnanapandithan vs K.Venkatachalam on 26 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-15T23:03:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008"},"wordCount":953,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008","name":"N.Gnanapandithan vs K.Venkatachalam on 26 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-15T23:03:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-gnanapandithan-vs-k-venkatachalam-on-26-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"N.Gnanapandithan vs K.Venkatachalam 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\/243677","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=243677"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/243677\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=243677"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=243677"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=243677"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}