{"id":245965,"date":"2007-08-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-08-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007"},"modified":"2015-10-02T05:40:05","modified_gmt":"2015-10-02T00:10:05","slug":"ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007","title":{"rendered":"Ambika Ammal vs Ramasamy on 13 August, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Ambika Ammal vs Ramasamy on 13 August, 2007<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\n                      DATED : 13\/08\/2007\n\n                            CORAM\n\n          THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM\n\n\n             CRP. NPD Nos.2279 and 2280 of 2007\n                            and\n                      MP No.1 of 2007\n\n\n\n\nAmbika Ammal                            .. Petitioner in both revisions\n\n\tVs\n\nRamasamy                                .. Respondent in both revisions<\/pre>\n<p>     Civil revision petitions preferred under Article 227 of<br \/>\nthe Constitution of India against the orders dated 13.2.2007<br \/>\npassed   in   I.A.Nos.706  of  2006  and  34  of   2007   in<br \/>\nO.S.No.167\/2000  on  the  file of the  District  Munsif  cum<br \/>\nJudicial Magistrate, Chengam.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<pre>          For Petitioner      :  Mr.M.Md.Basha\n\n\n\n                        COMMON ORDER\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>       This  order  shall  govern  the  above  two  revision<\/p>\n<p>petitions.  They  have arisen from the  two  orders  of  the<\/p>\n<p>District  Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Chengam,  made  in<\/p>\n<p>two applications one in I.A.No.706\/2006 to condone the delay<\/p>\n<p>of  547  days in making an application to set aside  an  ex-<\/p>\n<p>parte decree and the other in I.A.No.34 of 2007 to set aside<\/p>\n<p>that ex-parte decree.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>       2.The  Court  heard  the  learned  Counsel  for   the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>      3.After  hearing the learned Counsel and also  looking<\/p>\n<p>into  the  materials, both the revisions, in the  considered<\/p>\n<p>opinion of this Court, do not carry any merit whatsoever.<\/p>\n<p>      4.It was a suit for declaration and for other reliefs.<\/p>\n<p>There  are  number  of defendants, out of  whom,  the  third<\/p>\n<p>defendant  was  the  only  person  contesting  the   matter.<\/p>\n<p>Written  statement  was filed by him.  Issues  were  framed.<\/p>\n<p>The  matter was posted for trial on 21.3.2005.  On that day,<\/p>\n<p>the  respondent\/3rd defendant did not appear.   An  ex-parte<\/p>\n<p>decree  came  to be passed.  In order to set  it  aside,  an<\/p>\n<p>application was filed in I.A.No.34 of 2007.  While doing so,<\/p>\n<p>there  was  a  delay of 547 days.  In order to  condone  the<\/p>\n<p>delay,  an  application in I.A.No.706\/2006 was filed.   Both<\/p>\n<p>the applications were taken up for consideration.  As far as<\/p>\n<p>the  delay excuse application was concerned, no counter  was<\/p>\n<p>filed,  and  the lower Court considered the reasons  therein<\/p>\n<p>and   allowed  that  application.   As  regards  the   other<\/p>\n<p>application, the learned Counsel for the plaintiff has  made<\/p>\n<p>an endorsement stating that notice may be sent to the party.<\/p>\n<p>The  lower  Court  also  took it as counter  not  filed  and<\/p>\n<p>allowed that application also.  Hence, these revisions  have<\/p>\n<p>arisen at the instance of the plaintiff before this Court.<\/p>\n<p>      5.The only contention urged by the learned Counsel for<\/p>\n<p>the  petitioner, is that in the instant case, there  was  no<\/p>\n<p>sufficient  cause  shown  by  the  respondent  herein,  even<\/p>\n<p>assuming  that  there was no counter filed by  the  revision<\/p>\n<p>petitioner;  that  in the absence of sufficient  cause,  the<\/p>\n<p>lower  Court  should  have dismissed the  application,  when<\/p>\n<p>there was a huge delay of 547 days; that as far as the other<\/p>\n<p>application to set aside the ex-parte decree was  concerned,<\/p>\n<p>it  was allowed even without notice to the party, and  under<\/p>\n<p>the circumstances, both the revisions have got to be ordered<\/p>\n<p>by  this  Court  by setting aside the orders  of  the  Court<\/p>\n<p>below.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>      6.The  Court  paid  its anxious consideration  on  the<\/p>\n<p>submissions made and looked into the materials available.<\/p>\n<p>      7.It  is true that the suit was contested by the third<\/p>\n<p>defendant.  It came up for trial on 21.3.2005.  Due  to  the<\/p>\n<p>absence  of  the respondent\/3rd defendant, he  was  set  ex-<\/p>\n<p>parte, and an ex-parte decree came to be passed.  There  was<\/p>\n<p>an application filed to set aside the same.  While doing so,<\/p>\n<p>there  was a delay of 547 days, and an application was filed<\/p>\n<p>to  condone  that delay.  Both the applications  were  filed<\/p>\n<p>only  after  notice  to  the Counsel for  the  plaintiff  on<\/p>\n<p>record.   As  far  as the delay condonation application  was<\/p>\n<p>concerned,  no  counter was filed, and  naturally,  even  if<\/p>\n<p>counter  was not filed, the lower Court was called  upon  to<\/p>\n<p>look  into  the affidavit in support of the application  and<\/p>\n<p>find  out  whether there is sufficiency of cause.   At  this<\/p>\n<p>juncture, there is no impediment for this Court to look into<\/p>\n<p>the  affidavit.  The affidavit would clearly reveal that the<\/p>\n<p>parties were close relations.  Apart from that, there was  a<\/p>\n<p>compromise  which was going on between them,  and  believing<\/p>\n<p>the   same,   the   third  defendant  was   keeping   quiet.<\/p>\n<p>Thereafter, he came to know that execution proceedings  were<\/p>\n<p>initiated, pending the compromise.  Under the circumstances,<\/p>\n<p>he   gave   instructions  to  his  Counsel   to   file   the<\/p>\n<p>applications.  In view of the close relationship between the<\/p>\n<p>parties and also the reasons adduced, this Court is  of  the<\/p>\n<p>opinion   that  the  delay  was  actually  to  be  condoned.<\/p>\n<p>Accordingly,  the lower Court has allowed that  application.<\/p>\n<p>The  revision  petitioner herein,  who  was  the  plaintiff,<\/p>\n<p>though served with the notice through Counsel, has not  even<\/p>\n<p>filed  counter.   Having failed to file counter  before  the<\/p>\n<p>Court  below,  now,  the contentions  put  forth  cannot  be<\/p>\n<p>countenanced at all.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>      8.As far as the other application to set aside the ex-<\/p>\n<p>parte  decree  was concerned, the learned  Counsel  for  the<\/p>\n<p>plaintiff though he was on record on that day, has  made  an<\/p>\n<p>endorsement stating that notice has got to be ordered to the<\/p>\n<p>party.   Once the Counsel is on record, and so  long  as  he<\/p>\n<p>does not report no instructions, he has to take notice,  and<\/p>\n<p>he  is  to  give  responsible answer to the Court;  but,  he<\/p>\n<p>failed.  Under the circumstances, the lower Court considered<\/p>\n<p>it  proper  to allow the application since it was  convinced<\/p>\n<p>that  it was a fit case where the ex-parte decree was to  be<\/p>\n<p>set  aside.   This  Court is unable to  notice  anything  to<\/p>\n<p>disturb  the  orders of the Court below.  Accordingly,  they<\/p>\n<p>are sustained.  Under the circumstances, the lower Court  is<\/p>\n<p>directed  to dispose of the suit on merits and in accordance<\/p>\n<p>with  law within a period of three months from the  date  of<\/p>\n<p>receipt  of  a copy of this order.  Accordingly, both  these<\/p>\n<p>civil   revision   petitions  are  dismissed.    No   costs.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, connected MP is also dismissed.<\/p>\n<p>nsv\/<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate<br \/>\nChengam.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Ambika Ammal vs Ramasamy on 13 August, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 13\/08\/2007 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM CRP. NPD Nos.2279 and 2280 of 2007 and MP No.1 of 2007 Ambika Ammal .. Petitioner in both revisions Vs Ramasamy .. Respondent in both revisions Civil revision [&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-245965","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 v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Ambika Ammal vs Ramasamy on 13 August, 2007 - 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\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ambika Ammal vs Ramasamy on 13 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-08-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-10-02T00:10:05+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\\\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ambika Ammal vs Ramasamy on 13 August, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-08-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-10-02T00:10:05+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007\"},\"wordCount\":935,\"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\\\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007\",\"name\":\"Ambika Ammal vs Ramasamy on 13 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-08-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-10-02T00:10:05+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ambika Ammal vs Ramasamy on 13 August, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"Ambika Ammal vs Ramasamy on 13 August, 2007 - 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\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ambika Ammal vs Ramasamy on 13 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-08-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-10-02T00:10:05+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\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ambika Ammal vs Ramasamy on 13 August, 2007","datePublished":"2007-08-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-10-02T00:10:05+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007"},"wordCount":935,"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\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007","name":"Ambika Ammal vs Ramasamy on 13 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-08-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-10-02T00:10:05+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ambika-ammal-vs-ramasamy-on-13-august-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ambika Ammal vs Ramasamy on 13 August, 2007"}]},{"@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\/245965","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=245965"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/245965\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=245965"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=245965"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=245965"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}