{"id":244792,"date":"2000-02-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2000-02-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000"},"modified":"2015-04-25T10:25:11","modified_gmt":"2015-04-25T04:55:11","slug":"jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000","title":{"rendered":"Jaidrath Singh &amp; Anr vs Jivendra Kumar &amp; Ors on 15 February, 2000"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Jaidrath Singh &amp; Anr vs Jivendra Kumar &amp; Ors on 15 February, 2000<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Bharucha<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Ruma Pal, S.P.Bharucha<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nJAIDRATH SINGH &amp; ANR.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nJIVENDRA KUMAR &amp; ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t15\/02\/2000\n\nBENCH:\nRuma Pal, S.P.Bharucha\n\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>      BHARUCHA, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The  issue  in  the appeals and in the  special  leave<br \/>\npetition  is the correctness of the result, as declared,  of<br \/>\nthe election to the post of Adhyaksha\/ President of the Zila<br \/>\nParishad,  Shahjahanpur.   The election was held  under\t the<br \/>\nprovisions   of\t the  U.P.    Zila  Parishads  (Election  of<br \/>\nAdhyaksha  and\tUp-Adhyaksha  and   Settlement\tof  Election<br \/>\nDisputes) Rules, 1963 framed under the provisions of Section<br \/>\n237  of\t the  Uttar  Pradesh Kshettra  Panchayats  and\tZila<br \/>\nPanchayats  Adhiniyam,\t1961.\tRule 26 of  the\t said  Rules<br \/>\nstates\tthat  Schedule II thereof sets out the\tinstructions<br \/>\nfor determining the result of elections.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The candidates at the concerned election, held on 22nd<br \/>\nMay, 1995, were Jivendra, Manvendra and Smt.  Gayatri Verma.<br \/>\nThere  were 31 electors, all of whom voted.  Jivendra got 10<br \/>\nfirst  preference  votes, Manvendra got 14 first  preference<br \/>\nvotes  and Gayatri got 7 first preference votes.  By  reason<br \/>\nof the provisions of Schedule II to the said Rules the quota<br \/>\nfor  securing  a  result  was 16, which none  of  the  three<br \/>\ncandidates  secured.   Gayatri,\t having secured\t the  lowest<br \/>\nnumber\tof  first preference votes, was eliminated  and\t the<br \/>\nsecond\t preference   votes  on\t  her  ballot  papers\twere<br \/>\nconsidered.   Jivendra got 5 more votes and Manvendra got  1<br \/>\nmore  .\t This meant that the number of votes secured on\t the<br \/>\nsecond\tcount  by  Jivendra  and   Manvendra  was  15  each.<br \/>\nAccordingly, the Returning Officer decided to draw lots, and<br \/>\nby reason thereof Jivendra was declared elected.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Manvendra\t filed\tan   election  petition\t challenging<br \/>\nJivendras  election.   The election petition succeeded\tand<br \/>\nappeals\t therefrom  were filed before the High\tCourt.\t The<br \/>\nmaintainability of the appeals was challenged in proceedings<br \/>\nwith which we are not concerned.  Ultimately, the High Court<br \/>\nwas required to hear and decide the appeals on their merits.<br \/>\nThe High Court, on a construction of Schedule II, noted that<br \/>\nneither\t Jivendra  nor Manvendra had, on the  second  count,<br \/>\nsecured\t the  quota of 16.  It held that no lots could\thave<br \/>\nbeen  drawn;   also that Manvendra could not be declared  as<br \/>\nelected\t on the basis that he had secured a larger number of<br \/>\nfirst  preference  votes  for the reason that  he  had\tbeen<br \/>\nunable to secure the mandatory quota.  Accordingly, the High<br \/>\nCourt  declared\t that a casual vacancy in the office of\t the<br \/>\nAdhyaksh had been created.\n<\/p>\n<p>      What is called for is an analysis of Schedule II.\t The<br \/>\nrelevant portion thereof may be quoted :  2.  Ascertain the<br \/>\nnumber\tof first preference votes secured by each  candidate<br \/>\nand credit him with that number.\n<\/p>\n<p>      3.   Add\tup  the\t numbers  so  credited\tto  all\t the<br \/>\ncandidates,  divide  the  total by two and add\tone  to\t the<br \/>\nquotient  disregarding any remainder.  The resulting  number<br \/>\nis  the quota sufficient to secure the return of  candidates<br \/>\nat the election.\n<\/p>\n<p>      4(1).   If  there are only two  contesting  candidates<br \/>\nthen:\n<\/p>\n<p>      (a)  If  one  candidate gets larger  number  of  first<br \/>\npreference  votes  than\t the other, declare  the  former  as<br \/>\nelected;  or<\/p>\n<p>      (b)  If both the candidates get equal number of  first<br \/>\npreference  votes, determine the result by drawing of  lots.<br \/>\nExclude\t the candidate on whom the lot falls and declare the<br \/>\nother candidates as elected.\n<\/p>\n<p>      (2).  If there are more than two candidates, then-\n<\/p>\n<p>      (a) If one of them is found to secure first preference<br \/>\nvotes  equal  to  or more than the  quota  determined  under<br \/>\nInstruction no.3, declare him as elected;  or<\/p>\n<p>      (b)  If  none  of them secure first  preference  votes<br \/>\nequal  to or more than the quota aforesaid proceed according<br \/>\nto  the\t instruction hereinafter taking\t into  consideration<br \/>\nsecond and subsequent preferences as may be necessary.\n<\/p>\n<p>      5.  If at the end of the first or any subsequent count<br \/>\nthe total number of votes credited to any candidate is equal<br \/>\nto or greater than the quota or there is only one continuing<br \/>\ncandidate, that candidate is declared elected.\n<\/p>\n<p>      6.   If  at the end of any count, no candidate can  be<br \/>\ndeclared elected :\n<\/p>\n<p>      (a)  exclude  the candidate who up to that  stage\t has<br \/>\nbeen credited with the lowest number of votes;\n<\/p>\n<p>      (b)  examine  all the ballot papers in his parcel\t and<br \/>\nsub-parcel,  arrange  the unexhausted papers in\t sub-parcels<br \/>\naccording to the next available preferences recorded thereon<br \/>\nfor  the continuing candidates, count the number of votes in<br \/>\neach  such  sub- parcel and credit it to the  candidate\t for<br \/>\nwhom such preference is recorded, transfer the sub-parcel to<br \/>\nthat  candidate\t and make a separate sub-parcel of  all\t the<br \/>\nexhausted papers;  and<\/p>\n<p>      (c)  see whether any of the continuing candidate\thas,<br \/>\nafter such transfer and credit, secured the quota.\n<\/p>\n<p>      If,  when a candidate has to be excluded under  clause\n<\/p>\n<p>(a)  above,  two or more candidates have been credited\twith<br \/>\nthe  same  number  of  votes and stand lowest  on  the\tpoll<br \/>\nexclude\t that candidate who had secured the lowest number of<br \/>\nfirst  preference votes and if that number also was the same<br \/>\nin the case of two or more candidates decide by lot which of<br \/>\nthem shall be excluded.\n<\/p>\n<p>      All  the sub-parcels of exhausted paper referred to in<br \/>\nclause\t(b)  above shall be set apart as finally dealt\twith<br \/>\nand  the vote recorded thereon shall not thereafter be taken<br \/>\ninto account.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Schedule\tII  requires  that each candidate  shall  be<br \/>\ncredited  with the number of first preference votes that are<br \/>\nsecured\t by him.  The total number of first preference votes<br \/>\nsecured\t by all the candidates shall be added, the aggregate<br \/>\nthereof divided by two and the resultant figure increased by<br \/>\none, disregarding any fraction.\t The resultant figure is the<br \/>\nquota  sufficient to secure the return of candidates at the<br \/>\nelection;   that  is  to say that a candidate  who  secures<br \/>\nvotes  equal  to or larger than the quota shall be  declared<br \/>\nelected.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Now, if there are only two candidates at the election,<br \/>\nthe candidate who gets the larger number of first preference<br \/>\nvotes  is  to  be declared elected.  It is only if  the\t two<br \/>\ncandidates  get\t an equal number of first  preference  votes<br \/>\nthat the result is to be determined by drawing of lots.\n<\/p>\n<p>      If  there are more than two candidates at the election<br \/>\nand  one  of them secures enough first preference  votes  to<br \/>\nmeet  the  quota, he shall be declared elected.\t If none  of<br \/>\nthe  candidates secures first preference votes equal to\t the<br \/>\nquota  then the candidate who has secured the lowest  number<br \/>\nof  first preference votes shall be eliminated.\t His  ballot<br \/>\npapers shall then to be examined for second preference votes<br \/>\nand  such  second preference votes shall be credited to\t the<br \/>\nconcerned  candidates.\t It shall then be seen\twhether\t any<br \/>\ncandidate  has\tsecured\t the quota and, if so, he  shall  be<br \/>\ndeclared  elected.   If\t not, the process of  exclusion\t and<br \/>\naddition  of votes on his ballot papers shall be  continued.<br \/>\nWhen  a\t candidate  has\t to  be excluded  and  two  or\tmore<br \/>\ncandidates  have been credited with the same number of votes<br \/>\nand stand lowest, that candidate shall be eliminated who has<br \/>\nsecured\t the  lowest  number of first preference  votes\t and<br \/>\nshould that number also be the same in the case of the other<br \/>\ncandidate,  a lot shall be drawn to determine which of\tthem<br \/>\nis to be excluded.\n<\/p>\n<p>      There  is a general provision in paragraph (5) of\t the<br \/>\nSchedule  which\t requires the Returning Officer to check  at<br \/>\nthe  end  of  the first or any subsequent  count  the  total<br \/>\nnumber\tof votes credited to each of the candidates;  if any<br \/>\none  of them secures the quota he shall be declared elected.<br \/>\nIt  also provides that if at the end of any subsequent count<br \/>\nthere is only one continuing candidate, that candidate shall<br \/>\nbe declared elected.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The  first  question,  therefore, is whether  for\t the<br \/>\npurposes  of  being elected every candidate must secure\t the<br \/>\nquota.\tWhere there are only two candidates, the quota plays<br \/>\nno  part.   Paragraph  (4) of the Schedule states  that\t the<br \/>\ncandidate  who secures more first preference votes than\t the<br \/>\nother shall be declared elected, and where both get an equal<br \/>\nnumber\tof first preference votes lots shall be drawn.\t The<br \/>\nquota  plays a part when there are more than two candidates.<br \/>\nIn that event successive counts shall be held until either a<br \/>\ncandidate secures the quota or only one candidate remains.\n<\/p>\n<p>      In  the case before us, there were three candidates so<br \/>\nthat  the  quota was relevant.\tThe first  preference  votes<br \/>\nwere cast thus :  14 in favour of Manvendra, 10 in favour of<br \/>\nJivendra and 7 in favour of Gayatri, aggregating to 31.\t The<br \/>\nquota  had to arrived at thus:\t31\/2 + 1 = 16  (disregarding<br \/>\nthe  fraction).\t  None\tof the three candidates\t secured  16<br \/>\nfirst  preference votes.  Gayatri, having secured the  least<br \/>\nnumber\tof  first preference votes, was eliminated  and\t the<br \/>\nsecond\t preference   votes  on\t  her  ballot  papers\twere<br \/>\nscrutinised.   Manvendra  secured 1 and Jivendra  secured  5<br \/>\nsecond\tpreference votes.  Their tally on the second  count,<br \/>\ntherefore,  was equal:\t15 votes each.\tNeither of them\t had<br \/>\nsecured the quota.\n<\/p>\n<p>      There  is\t no  provision\tin the Schedule\t to  meet  a<br \/>\nsituation such as this.\n<\/p>\n<p>      In the Memorandum of Appeal reference has been made to<br \/>\nthree  judgments of the Allahabad High Court and it has been<br \/>\nsubmitted  that these cases hold, relying upon paragraph (6)<br \/>\nof  the\t Schedule,  that where\tboth  continuing  candidates<br \/>\nsecure\tan equal number of votes on the second count and one<br \/>\nof  them  had  secured a lesser number of  first  preference<br \/>\nvotes,\the  should be eliminated and the candidate  who\t had<br \/>\nsecured\t the higher number of first preference votes  should<br \/>\nbe declared elected.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The  first  of these judgments of the  Allahabad\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt,\tall  delivered by learned Single Judges, is  in\t the<br \/>\ncase  of  Nanak Chand vs.  Vachaspati and another  [1968(66)<br \/>\nAllahabad  Law Journal 29].  The judgment refers to Rule  26<br \/>\nof  the\t Rules,\t which lays down that after  all  the  valid<br \/>\nballot papers have been arranged in parcels according to the<br \/>\nfirst  preference recorded for each candidate, the Returning<br \/>\nOfficer\t shall proceed to determine the result of the voting<br \/>\nin  accordance\twith  the   instructions  contained  in\t the<br \/>\nSchedule.   The Schedule, the learned Judge notes, makes  no<br \/>\nprovision  as to how the result should be declared where the<br \/>\nlast  two candidates after exclusion of others are found  to<br \/>\nhave  received\tan equal number of votes, counting both\t the<br \/>\nfirst  and  the\t second\t  preference  votes  together.\t The<br \/>\nSchedule  does\tmake  provision, however, for  a  situation,<br \/>\nwhere  it  is  found that there are two or  more  candidates<br \/>\nreceiving  the\tlowest\tnumber\tof  votes;   in\t that  event<br \/>\nparagraph  (6) of the Schedule provides that that  candidate<br \/>\nshall  be excluded who had secured the lower number of first<br \/>\npreference  votes.  For this reason the learned Judge  finds<br \/>\nthat  preference  is to be given to first preference  votes.<br \/>\nHe says:\n<\/p>\n<p>      It is only when there is equality of first preference<br \/>\nvotes  that  the exclusion of a candidate is  determined  by<br \/>\ndrawing of lot.\t Rule 26 also refers to first preference.  I<br \/>\nam thus of opinion that in the election of the Adhyaksha and<br \/>\nUp-Adhyaksha  the  drawing  of\t lot  shall  not  ordinarily<br \/>\ndetermine  the result of the election in case two candidates<br \/>\nare  found  to have secured the same number of\tvotes.\t The<br \/>\nrule  adopted  shall  be  that out  of\tthe  two  candidates<br \/>\nsecuring  the  same  number of votes, the  one\twho  secured<br \/>\ngreater\t number of first preference votes is to be  declared<br \/>\nelected;   but\tif they secured not only the same number  of<br \/>\nvotes  but  also the same number of first preference  votes,<br \/>\nthe  lot  shall determine the candidate to be  excluded,  in<br \/>\nother  words,  the  candidate not drawing the lot  shall  be<br \/>\ndeclared to have been elected.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The  judgment  in\t <a href=\"\/doc\/1174846\/\">Jagat Singh vs.  Dharam  Pal  Singh<\/a><br \/>\n[1984(82) Allahabad Law Journal 859] states:\n<\/p>\n<p>      There  being  a  variance\t in  the  number  of  first<br \/>\npreference  votes  secured by the appellant on the one\thand<br \/>\nand  the  respondent No.1 on the other, that becomes, in  my<br \/>\nview,  decisive\t in the ultimate analysis of the  prescribed<br \/>\nmanner of counting for the purpose of being declared elected<br \/>\nor the result being determined.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The  judgment holds that paragraph (6) of the Schedule<br \/>\nclearly\t envisages  the determination of the result  on\t the<br \/>\nbasis  of the strength of first preference votes where there<br \/>\nis  equality  of  votes\t in favour  of\tthe  two  continuing<br \/>\ncandidates  on\ttaking\ttheir second preference\t votes\tinto<br \/>\naccount.   The last judgment of the Allahabad High Court  on<br \/>\nthe  point is in Genda Singh vs.  Distt.  Judge, Aligarh and<br \/>\nothers\t[1985(83) Allahabad Law Journal 436] and it  follows<br \/>\nthe judgment in Jagat Singhs case (supra).\n<\/p>\n<p>      We  find some difficulty in reading paragraph 6 of the<br \/>\nSchedule  in  the  manner in which it has been done  by\t the<br \/>\nlearned\t Judges\t of  the Allahabad High Court in  the  cases<br \/>\naforementioned.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Paragraph\t (6) of the Schedule can, in any event,\t not<br \/>\napply  to  facts such as those of the case in hand  for\t the<br \/>\nsimple\treason\tthat under the provisions of that  paragraph<br \/>\nonly  a candidate who has secured the quota can be  declared<br \/>\nelected.   To use as illustration the votes secured in\tthis<br \/>\ncase, even if, on the second count, Jivendra Kumar was to be<br \/>\nexcluded  by reason of the fact that he had secured 10 first<br \/>\npreference  votes as against Manvendras 14 first preference<br \/>\nvotes,\tManvendra  could not be declared elected because  he<br \/>\nhad  not  secured the quota of 16.  In our view,  therefore,<br \/>\nthe High Court was right in holding that Manvendra could not<br \/>\nbe declared elected.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The provision in paragraph (4) for the drawing of lots<br \/>\noperates  only\twhen both candidates get an equal number  of<br \/>\nfirst  preference votes.  The provision in paragraph (6) for<br \/>\nthe  drawing  of lots is applicable only to determine  which<br \/>\nout  of\t two  or more candidates who have secured  the\tsame<br \/>\nnumber\tof  votes at a count subsequent to the\tfirst  count<br \/>\nshall  be  eliminated;\tif these candidates happen  to\thave<br \/>\nsecured\t the same number of first preference votes it  shall<br \/>\nbe  decided by lots which of them is to be eliminated.\t The<br \/>\ninstructions  to  the Returning Officer in the Schedule\t are<br \/>\ndetailed  and he is obliged by Rule 26 to follow them.\tThey<br \/>\ntell  him when he may resort to the drawing of lots but\t the<br \/>\ncontingency of the two continuing candidates having the same<br \/>\nnumber\tof votes, counting both first and second  preference<br \/>\nvotes,\tis not covered thereby.\t No resort to the drawing of<br \/>\nlots  could have been made in the absence of an\t instruction<br \/>\nin  that  behalf in the Schedule (see <a href=\"\/doc\/1634199\/\">University of Poona  &amp;<br \/>\nOrs.   vs.   Shankar  Narhar  Ageshe &amp;\tOrs.,<\/a>  (1971)  Supp.<br \/>\nS.C.R.\t 597).\tWe are of the opinion, in the circumstances,<br \/>\nthat  the  Returning Officer was not entitled to  draw\tlots<br \/>\nbetween\t Jivendra  and\tManvendra.    The  High\t Court\twas,<br \/>\ntherefore, right in holding that the election of Jivendra by<br \/>\nthe draw of lots was invalid.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Accordingly,  the\t declaration of the High Court\tthat<br \/>\nthere  was  a  vacancy\tin the office of  the  Adhyaksh\t was<br \/>\njustified.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The  appeals  and\t the   special\tleave  petition\t are<br \/>\ndismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>      No order as to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Jaidrath Singh &amp; Anr vs Jivendra Kumar &amp; Ors on 15 February, 2000 Author: Bharucha Bench: Ruma Pal, S.P.Bharucha PETITIONER: JAIDRATH SINGH &amp; ANR. Vs. RESPONDENT: JIVENDRA KUMAR &amp; ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 15\/02\/2000 BENCH: Ruma Pal, S.P.Bharucha JUDGMENT: BHARUCHA, J. The issue in the appeals and in the special leave [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-244792","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Jaidrath Singh &amp; Anr vs Jivendra Kumar &amp; Ors on 15 February, 2000 - 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\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Jaidrath Singh &amp; Anr vs Jivendra Kumar &amp; Ors on 15 February, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000\" \/>\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=\"2000-02-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-04-25T04:55:11+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=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Jaidrath Singh &amp; Anr vs Jivendra Kumar &amp; Ors on 15 February, 2000\",\"datePublished\":\"2000-02-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-25T04:55:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000\"},\"wordCount\":2460,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000\",\"name\":\"Jaidrath Singh &amp; Anr vs Jivendra Kumar &amp; Ors on 15 February, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2000-02-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-25T04:55:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jaidrath Singh &amp; Anr vs Jivendra Kumar &amp; Ors on 15 February, 2000\"}]},{\"@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":"Jaidrath Singh &amp; Anr vs Jivendra Kumar &amp; Ors on 15 February, 2000 - 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\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Jaidrath Singh &amp; Anr vs Jivendra Kumar &amp; Ors on 15 February, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2000-02-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-04-25T04:55:11+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Jaidrath Singh &amp; Anr vs Jivendra Kumar &amp; Ors on 15 February, 2000","datePublished":"2000-02-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-25T04:55:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000"},"wordCount":2460,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000","name":"Jaidrath Singh &amp; Anr vs Jivendra Kumar &amp; Ors on 15 February, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2000-02-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-25T04:55:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jaidrath-singh-anr-vs-jivendra-kumar-ors-on-15-february-2000#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jaidrath Singh &amp; Anr vs Jivendra Kumar &amp; Ors on 15 February, 2000"}]},{"@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\/244792","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=244792"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/244792\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=244792"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=244792"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=244792"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}