{"id":243757,"date":"2009-04-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-04-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009"},"modified":"2017-04-05T11:28:30","modified_gmt":"2017-04-05T05:58:30","slug":"smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009","title":{"rendered":"Smt.Vidya Devi & Ors. vs Shri Subhash Chand & Ors. on 13 April, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court<\/div>\n
Smt.Vidya Devi & Ors. vs Shri Subhash Chand & Ors. on 13 April, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: Kailash Gambhir<\/div>\n
     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI\n\n                   FAO. No.84\/1995\n\n                            Judgment reserved on:    22.1.2008\n\n                                 Judgment delivered on: 13.4.2009.\n\nSmt. Vidya Devi & Ors.                        ..... Appellants.\n                               Through: Mrs. Manjeet Chawla, Adv.\n\n                   versus\n\n\nShri Subhash Chand & Ors.                           ..... Respondents\n                         Through: Nemo.\n\n\nCORAM:\nHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR,\n\n1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may\n   be allowed to see the judgment?                               Yes\n\n2. To be referred to Reporter or not?                            Yes\n\n3. Whether the judgment should be reported\n   in the Digest?                                                Yes\n\nKAILASH GAMBHIR, J.\n<\/pre>\n
1.   The present appeal arises out of the award dated of the<\/p>\n
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal whereby the Tribunal awarded a<\/p>\n
sum of Rs. 1,80,000\/- along with interest @ 12% per annum to<\/p>\n
the claimants.\n<\/p>\n
 FAO NO. 84\/1995                                              Page 1 of 8<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
 2.   The brief conspectus of the facts is as follows:<\/p>\n
3.   The deceased Late Sh. Hans Raj, aged about 35 yrs was<\/p>\n
working as a self employed businessman, working under the<\/p>\n
name and style of M\/s Jyoti Travels. On October 1, 1988 he was<\/p>\n
driving a maruti car bearing licence plate No. DBP-14 from Pooth<\/p>\n
Kalan towards Kutabgarh via Karala. When the car reached near<\/p>\n
village Karala, a half body truck bearing registration No. DLL-<\/p>\n
3195 came from the opposite direction, at a high speed and<\/p>\n
without blowing horn. The offending truck violently dashed<\/p>\n
against the maruti car and Sh. Hans Raj succumbed to his injuries<\/p>\n
at the accident site itself, whereas the other occupants sustained<\/p>\n
fatal injuries and were removed to Hindu Rao Hospital.<\/p>\n
4.   A claim petition was filed on 31st March 1989 and an award<\/p>\n
was made on 14th February 1995. Aggrieved with the said award<\/p>\n
enhancement is claimed by way of the present appeal.<\/p>\n
5.   Mrs. Manjeet Chawla, counsel for the appellants assailed the<\/p>\n
said award on quantum of compensation. Counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellants contended that the tribunal has erred in assessing the<\/p>\n
income of the deceased at Rs. 2,000\/-, without considering future<\/p>\n
 FAO NO. 84\/1995                                         Page 2 of 8<\/span>
\n prospects of the deceased. It was urged by the counsel that the<\/p>\n
tribunal   erred   in   not   considering   future   prospects   while<\/p>\n
computing compensation as it failed to appreciate that the<\/p>\n
deceased would have earned much more in near future. The<\/p>\n
counsel pleads that the Tribunal should have applied the formula<\/p>\n
laid down under Kerala State Road Transport Corporation<\/p>\n
Vs. Susamma Thomas & Ors, 1994 ACJ 1 (SC), and applying<\/p>\n
that, the income should have been doubled and then the loss of<\/p>\n
dependency should have been decided. Secondly, the counsel<\/p>\n
contended that the multiplier applied by the Tribunal i.e. 10 is<\/p>\n
very less and the same should have been 17. Thirdly, no amount<\/p>\n
towards Non Pecuniary head is granted, thus the counsel pleaded<\/p>\n
that some compensation towards loss of love & affection, funeral<\/p>\n
expenses etc. should be granted. Fourthly, the counsel also<\/p>\n
raised the contention that the rate of interest allowed by the<\/p>\n
tribunal has been awarded only for 4 years and same should have<\/p>\n
been allowed from the date of filing of the petition till its<\/p>\n
realisation.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
6.   Nobody has been appearing for the respondents.<\/p>\n
 FAO NO. 84\/1995                                             Page 3 of 8<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
 7.   I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused<\/p>\n
the record.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
8.   The appellants claimants had examined only one witness as<\/p>\n
regards the quantum of compensation. The said witness, Smt.<\/p>\n
Vidya Devi, PW4, deposed that her deceased husband was<\/p>\n
running a bus under the name & style of M\/s. Jyoti Travels,<\/p>\n
Poothkalan, Delhi. She had brought on record the original as well<\/p>\n
as the photocopy of the registration book, Ex. PW 4\/A, according<\/p>\n
to which, the bus bearing registration no. DEP 6463 was<\/p>\n
registered in the name of Sh. Hans Raj. She deposed that her<\/p>\n
husband used to give her Rs. 2000\/-pm for household purposes.<\/p>\n
According to her, the deceased could have bought more buses<\/p>\n
and could have enhanced his income had he not died in the<\/p>\n
accident. After considering all these factors, I am of the view that<\/p>\n
the tribunal has not erred in assessing the income of the<\/p>\n
deceased at Rs. 2250. There is no justification to interfere in the<\/p>\n
same.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
9.   As regards the future prospects I am of the view that there<\/p>\n
is no sufficient material on record to award future prospects.<\/p>\n
 FAO NO. 84\/1995                                           Page 4 of 8<\/span>
\n Therefore, the tribunal committed no error in not granting future<\/p>\n
prospects in the facts and circumstances of the case.<\/p>\n
10.   As regards the contention of the counsel for the appellant<\/p>\n
that the tribunal has erred in applying the multiplier of 10 in the<\/p>\n
facts and circumstances of the case, I feel that the tribunal has<\/p>\n
committed error. This case pertains to the year 1988 and at that<\/p>\n
time II schedule to the Motor Vehicles act was not brought on the<\/p>\n
statute books. The said schedule came on the statute book in the<\/p>\n
year 1994 and prior to 1994 the law of the land was as laid down<\/p>\n
by the Hon’ble Apex Court in 1994 SCC (Cri) 335, G.M., Kerala<\/p>\n
SRTC v. Susamma Thomas. In the<\/a> said judgment it was<\/p>\n
observed by the Court that maximum multiplier of 16 could be<\/p>\n
applied by the Courts, which after coming in to force of the II<\/p>\n
schedule has risen to 18. The deceased was aged about 35 yrs at<\/p>\n
the time of the accident and is survived by his widow wife, 2<\/p>\n
minor children and parents. In the facts of the present case, I am<\/p>\n
of the view that after looking at the age of the claimants and the<\/p>\n
deceased and after taking a balanced view considering the<\/p>\n
applicable multiplier as per II Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act,<\/p>\n
 FAO NO. 84\/1995                                          Page 5 of 8<\/span>
\n the multiplier of 15 should have been applied. Therefore, in the<\/p>\n
facts of the instant case the multiplier of 15 shall be applicable.<\/p>\n
11.   As regards the issue of interest that the rate of interest<\/p>\n
should have been awarded by the tribunal from the date of filing<\/p>\n
of the petition in place deducting interest for the period four<\/p>\n
years only, I feel that the deduction of interest by the tribunal is<\/p>\n
just and fair and requires no interference. The tribunal observed<\/p>\n
that the rate of interest has not been awarded to the appellants,<\/p>\n
since as per the record, the claimants did not act with due<\/p>\n
diligence in prosecuting the petition on some dates of hearing<\/p>\n
and no steps had been taken by them to summon the witnesses. I<\/p>\n
feel that no interference is warranted in this regard.<\/p>\n
12.   On the contention regarding that the tribunal has erred in<\/p>\n
not awarding compensation towards loss of love & affection,<\/p>\n
funeral expenses, loss of estate, loss of consortium and the loss<\/p>\n
of services, which were being rendered by the deceased to the<\/p>\n
appellants, I feel that the same should have been awarded by the<\/p>\n
tribunal. In this regard compensation towards loss of love and<\/p>\n
affection is awarded at Rs. 40,000\/-; compensation towards<\/p>\n
funeral expenses is awarded at Rs. 5,000\/- and compensation<\/p>\n
 FAO NO. 84\/1995                                            Page 6 of 8<\/span>
\n towards loss of estate is awarded at Rs. 10,000\/-. Further, Rs.<\/p>\n
50,000\/- is awarded towards loss of consortium.<\/p>\n
13.   As far as the contention pertaining to the awarding of<\/p>\n
amount towards mental pain and sufferings caused to the<\/p>\n
appellants due to the sudden demise of the deceased and the<\/p>\n
loss of services, which were being rendered by the deceased to<\/p>\n
the appellants is concerned, I do not feel inclined to award any<\/p>\n
amount as compensation towards the same as the same are not<\/p>\n
conventional heads of damages.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
14.   On the basis of the discussion, the income of the deceased<\/p>\n
is taken as Rs. 2250\/-. After making 1\/3rd deductions the monthly<\/p>\n
loss of dependency comes to Rs. 1500\/- and the annual loss of<\/p>\n
dependency comes to Rs. 18,000\/- per annum and after applying<\/p>\n
multiplier of 15 it comes to Rs. 2,70,000\/-. Thus, the total loss of<\/p>\n
dependency comes to Rs. 2,70,000\/-. After considering Rs.<\/p>\n
1,05,000\/-, which is granted towards non-pecuniary damages, the<\/p>\n
total compensation comes out as Rs. 3,75,000\/-.<\/p>\n
15.   In view of the above discussion, the total compensation is<\/p>\n
enhanced to Rs. 3,75,000\/- from Rs. 1,80,000\/- with interest @<\/p>\n
 FAO NO. 84\/1995                                           Page 7 of 8<\/span>
\n 7.5% per annum in the enhanced compensation from the date of<\/p>\n
filing of the petition till realisation and the same should be paid to<\/p>\n
the appellants by the respondent insurance company. The<\/p>\n
enhanced compensation be apportioned in the same ratio as<\/p>\n
done by the Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n
16.   With the above direction, the present appeal is disposed of.<\/p>\n
13.4.2009                               KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.\n\n\n\n\n FAO NO. 84\/1995                                             Page 8 of 8<\/span>\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court Smt.Vidya Devi & Ors. vs Shri Subhash Chand & Ors. on 13 April, 2009 Author: Kailash Gambhir IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO. No.84\/1995 Judgment reserved on: 22.1.2008 Judgment delivered on: 13.4.2009. Smt. Vidya Devi & Ors. ….. Appellants. Through: Mrs. Manjeet Chawla, Adv. versus Shri Subhash Chand […]<\/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":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-243757","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSmt.Vidya Devi & Ors. vs Shri Subhash Chand & Ors. on 13 April, 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\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Smt.Vidya Devi & Ors. vs Shri Subhash Chand & Ors. on 13 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-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=\"2009-04-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-04-05T05:58:30+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Smt.Vidya Devi & Ors. vs Shri Subhash Chand & Ors. on 13 April, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-05T05:58:30+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1312,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009\",\"name\":\"Smt.Vidya Devi & Ors. vs Shri Subhash Chand & Ors. on 13 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-05T05:58:30+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Smt.Vidya Devi & Ors. vs Shri Subhash Chand & Ors. on 13 April, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"Smt.Vidya Devi & Ors. vs Shri Subhash Chand & Ors. on 13 April, 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\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Smt.Vidya Devi & Ors. vs Shri Subhash Chand & Ors. on 13 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-04-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-04-05T05:58:30+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Smt.Vidya Devi & Ors. vs Shri Subhash Chand & Ors. on 13 April, 2009","datePublished":"2009-04-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-05T05:58:30+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009"},"wordCount":1312,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009","name":"Smt.Vidya Devi & Ors. vs Shri Subhash Chand & Ors. on 13 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-04-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-05T05:58:30+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-vidya-devi-ors-vs-shri-subhash-chand-ors-on-13-april-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Smt.Vidya Devi & Ors. vs Shri Subhash Chand & Ors. on 13 April, 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:\/\/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\/243757","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=243757"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/243757\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=243757"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=243757"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=243757"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}