{"id":246837,"date":"2008-10-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-10-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008"},"modified":"2018-04-12T17:26:15","modified_gmt":"2018-04-12T11:56:15","slug":"shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008","title":{"rendered":"Shardaben vs Mukundkumar on 16 October, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Shardaben vs Mukundkumar on 16 October, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: K.A.Puj,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSA\/170\/2008\t 7\/ 7\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSECOND\nAPPEAL No. 170 of 2008\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nSHARDABEN\nDAMODARDAS PANDYA - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nMUKUNDKUMAR\nDALSUKHRAM PANDYA - Defendant(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nNC NAYAK for\nAppellant(s) : 1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.5, 1.2.6,1.2.7 MS\nJYOTSNA M AMIN for Appellant(s) : 1, 1.2.1, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.5,\n1.2.6,1.2.7  \nMR PRABHAKAR UPADYAY for Defendant(s) :\n1, \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 16\/10\/2008 \n\n \n\n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>\t\tThe<br \/>\nappellants original plaintiffs have filed the Second Appeal u\/s.100<br \/>\nof the Code of Civil Procedure, challenging the order passed by the<br \/>\nlearned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No.2, Kalol- Gandhingar<br \/>\nin Regular Civil Appeal No.51 of 1997 on 17th November,<br \/>\n2006, by which the judgment and decree of the 2nd Joint<br \/>\nCivil Judge (J.D.) at Kalol passed in Regular Civil Suit No.171 of<br \/>\n1990 is confirmed. This Court has issued notice on 04.09.2008. On<br \/>\nissuance of notice, Mr. Prabhakar Upadyay, learned advocate has filed<br \/>\nhis appearance on behalf of the respondent\/original defendant.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tIt<br \/>\nis the case of the appellants that the appellants\/plaintiffs filed<br \/>\nsuit being RCS No.171\/90 for declaration to the effect that the<br \/>\ndefendant has no right to enter into the suit land bearing block Nos.<br \/>\n63\/1, 63\/2, 70 and 85\/21 being ancestral land received by the<br \/>\nplaintiffs in their share through their late father and also from<br \/>\ncreating any hindrances in their use and occupation thereof and for<br \/>\npermanent injunction in the same terms with respect to the said lands<br \/>\nin question situated and lying at village Mubarakpura, Tal. Kalol,<br \/>\nDistrict Gandhinagar on the strength of different revenue entries<br \/>\nmutated from time to time.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tPrior<br \/>\nto filing of Regular Civil Suit No.171 of 1990, the plaintiffs&#8217; late<br \/>\nfather had filed Civil Suit No.177 of 1989 which was withdrawn<br \/>\nseeking permission to file afresh  suit which permission was granted<br \/>\nunconditionally by the learned Civil Judge.  Though the plaintiffs<br \/>\nhave asked for the liberty to file a fresh suit, the same was not<br \/>\ngranted. Without challenging the said order the plaintiffs have filed<br \/>\n the present suit on the same subject matter and the learned Trial<br \/>\nJudge has dismissed the said suit on the ground that the suit was not<br \/>\nmaintainable in view of the principle of Res Judicata. Being<br \/>\naggrieved by the said decision, the appellants have filed Regular<br \/>\nCivil Appeal before the learned District Judge and the same also came<br \/>\nto be dismissed. While dismissing the said appeal, the learned<br \/>\nDistrict Judge has specifically observed that it is clear and<br \/>\nundisputed fact that the plaintiffs have miserably failed to<br \/>\nestablish their case under Order 23 of the Civil Procedure Code so<br \/>\nfar as maintainability of the another suit on the principle of Res<br \/>\nJudicata is concerned, and also<br \/>\nunder the provisions of Order 2 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code.<br \/>\nThe learned District Judge came to the conclusion that the impugned<br \/>\norder and judgment is in accordance with law and there is no<br \/>\ninfirmity in the said order and judgment.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tIt<br \/>\nis this order which is under challenge in the second appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tMs.\n<\/p>\n<p>Jyotsna Amin, learned advocate appearing for the appellants has<br \/>\nsubmitted that the Courts below have grossly erred in arriving at the<br \/>\nconclusion that the suit is barred by the principle of Res<br \/>\nJudicata. She has<br \/>\nfurther submitted that the earlier suit was withdrawn by the<br \/>\nplaintiffs with a liberty to file a fresh suit. While granting such<br \/>\npermission to withdraw the suit, the learned Trial Judge has not<br \/>\nstated anything with regard to the permission sought for by the<br \/>\nplaintiffs to file a fresh suit. She has, therefore, submitted that<br \/>\nwhether the principle of Res Judicata<br \/>\nis applicable especially when the earlier suit between the same<br \/>\nparties has not been decided on merits and no issues have been<br \/>\ndetermined is a substantial question of law. She has further<br \/>\nsubmitted that it cannot be said that fresh suit is barred especially<br \/>\nwhen in the earlier suit between the same parties, permission to<br \/>\nwithdraw the suit was prayed for and the same was not rejected. In<br \/>\nsupport of her submission she relied on the decision of the Calcutta<br \/>\nHigh Court in case of Sukumar Banerjee v. Dilip Kumar Sarkar<br \/>\nand Ors. reported in AIR 1982 Calcutta 17, the decision of the<br \/>\nAllahabad High Court in case of Bharat &amp; Ors. v. Ram Pratap<br \/>\nand Ors., reported in AIR 1985 Allahabad 61, the<br \/>\ndecision of Allahabad High Court in case of Jai Prakash v.<br \/>\nRajendra Prasad &amp; Ors. reported in AIR 2007 Allahabad 112<br \/>\nand decision of this<br \/>\nCourt in case of Kantibhai D. Patel through <a href=\"\/doc\/55216\/\">Power of Attorney<br \/>\nHolder Yogeshkumar K. Patel v. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation<\/a><br \/>\nreported in 1998(1) G.L.R.183; and submitted that the fresh suit<br \/>\nfiled by the plaintiffs is not barred by the principle of Res<br \/>\nJudicata and hence on the basis<br \/>\nof the principles laid down in the aforesaid judgments, the<br \/>\nsubstantial question of law proposed by the appellants is required to<br \/>\nbe framed by the Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tMr.\n<\/p>\n<p>Prabhakar Upadyay, learned advocate appearing for the respondent, on<br \/>\nthe other hand, has submitted that since no permission has been<br \/>\ngranted by the trial Court while allowing the plaintiffs to withdraw<br \/>\nthe earlier suit, fresh suit is not maintainable and both the Courts<br \/>\nbelow have, therefore, rightly held that the suit is barred by the<br \/>\nprinciple of Res Judicata. In support of his submission, he<br \/>\nrelied on the decision of this Court in case of Narayan Jethanand,<br \/>\nsince deceased by his heirs &amp; legal representatives v. Asapuri<br \/>\nVijay Saw Mill reported in<br \/>\n1995(1)G.L.H. 1147 and the decision of the Hon&#8217;ble<br \/>\nSupreme Court in case of Sarva Shramik Sanghatana (K.V) Mumbai v.<br \/>\nState of Maharashtra reported in AIR 2008 SC 946.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tHaving<br \/>\nheard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and<br \/>\nhaving gone through the orders passed by the Courts below and the<br \/>\nvarious authorities cited before the Court, this Court is of the view<br \/>\nthat no substantial question of law arises out of the orders passed<br \/>\nby the Courts below. It is an admitted position that the earlier<br \/>\norder passed by the trial Court whereby the plaintiffs were permitted<br \/>\nto withdraw their suit unconditionally has become final, and the said<br \/>\norder has not been challenged by the present appellants before the<br \/>\nhigher authorities. It is also an admitted position that the<br \/>\nplaintiffs have sought the permission to file a fresh suit. However,<br \/>\nthe said permission was not granted. Though it is not specifically<br \/>\nrejected, no reference was made with regard to the permission sought<br \/>\nfor by the plaintiffs while withdrawing the earlier suit. It is,<br \/>\ntherefore, considered that no permission was granted by the Court.<br \/>\nDespite this, the plaintiffs have filed fresh suit on the same<br \/>\nsubject matter and between the same parties. The plaintiffs&#8217; suit is,<br \/>\ntherefore, clearly hit by the principle of Res Judicata as the<br \/>\nposition of law is very clear on this subject. When the fresh suit is<br \/>\nfiled on the same subject matter and between the same parties, it is<br \/>\nnot maintainable unless the Court has granted specific permission to<br \/>\nfile such suit. Here the cases relied upon by the learned advocate<br \/>\nappearing for the appellants are altogether on different points. In<br \/>\nthose cases, the orders and judgments under challenge by the parties<br \/>\nare those orders where the permission was refused and those very<br \/>\norders were under challenge. Here in the present case that earlier<br \/>\norder was not challenged by the plaintiffs. So far as the subsequent<br \/>\nsuit is concerned, this Court has clearly taken the view in case of<br \/>\nNarayan Jethanand (supra)<br \/>\nthat where the plaintiff withdraws the former suit without permission<br \/>\nof the Court, he is precluded from institution of a fresh suit in<br \/>\nrespect of the same subject matter under Order 23, Rule 4 of the Code<br \/>\nand against the same defendant. This rule is mandatory. Therefore,<br \/>\nthe plaintiff cannot thereafter institute a suit for enforcing what<br \/>\nwas the subject matter of the former suit. The subject matter in the<br \/>\nformer and subsequent suit was the same. The subject matter means<br \/>\nseries of acts or transactions alleged to exist giving rise to the<br \/>\nrelief claimed. Therefore, in such a situation, when the former suit<br \/>\nis withdrawn unconditionally or without any order granting leave to<br \/>\nwithdraw the suit with liberty to bring fresh suit. In the<br \/>\ncircumstances, would obviously operate a bar to a fresh suit, as<br \/>\ncontemplated by the provisions of Order 23, Rule 4. There is no<br \/>\nreason, therefore, to interfere with the impugned judgment and decree<br \/>\nrecorded by the trial Court. The Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court in the case of<br \/>\nSarva Shramik Sanghatana (K.V) Mumbai v. State of<br \/>\nMaharashtra (Supra) has taken a<br \/>\nview that ?SNo doubt, Order 23, Rule 1(4) of the Code of Civil<br \/>\nProcedure states that where the plaintiff withdraws a suit without<br \/>\npermission of the Court, he is precluded from instituting any fresh<br \/>\nsuit in respect of the same subject matter.??\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tConsidering<br \/>\nthe aforesaid judgments of this Court as well as Hon&#8217;ble Supreme<br \/>\nCourt as well as further considering the clear provisions of Order 23<br \/>\nof Civil Procedure Code, this Court is of the view that both the<br \/>\nCourts below have taken the correct view in the matter and no<br \/>\nsubstantial question of law arises in this second appeal. The appeal<br \/>\nis, therefore, dismissed. The interim order, if any, stands vacated.<br \/>\nNotice discharged.\n<\/p>\n<p>[K.A.PUJ,J.]<\/p>\n<p>jani<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Shardaben vs Mukundkumar on 16 October, 2008 Author: K.A.Puj,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SA\/170\/2008 7\/ 7 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SECOND APPEAL No. 170 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed 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":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-246837","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Shardaben vs Mukundkumar on 16 October, 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\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shardaben vs Mukundkumar on 16 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-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=\"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-04-12T11:56:15+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shardaben vs Mukundkumar on 16 October, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-12T11:56:15+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1490,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008\",\"name\":\"Shardaben vs Mukundkumar on 16 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-12T11:56:15+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shardaben vs Mukundkumar on 16 October, 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":"Shardaben vs Mukundkumar on 16 October, 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\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shardaben vs Mukundkumar on 16 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-04-12T11:56:15+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shardaben vs Mukundkumar on 16 October, 2008","datePublished":"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-12T11:56:15+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008"},"wordCount":1490,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008","name":"Shardaben vs Mukundkumar on 16 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-12T11:56:15+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shardaben-vs-mukundkumar-on-16-october-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shardaben vs Mukundkumar on 16 October, 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\/246837","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=246837"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/246837\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=246837"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=246837"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=246837"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}