{"id":249881,"date":"2009-12-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-12-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009"},"modified":"2015-01-27T18:45:07","modified_gmt":"2015-01-27T13:15:07","slug":"hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009","title":{"rendered":"Hari Parkash vs Ram Kumar on 17 December, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Hari Parkash vs Ram Kumar on 17 December, 2009<\/div>\n
R.S.A.No. 2299 of 2007 (O&M)                                     1\n\n\n\n      In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh\n\n\n                        R.S.A.No. 2299 of 2007 (O&M)\n                        Date of decision: 17.12.2009\n\n\nHari Parkash\n                                                       ......Appellant\n                        Versus\n\n\nRam Kumar\n                                                    .......Respondents\n\n\nCORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA\n\n\nPresent:   Mr.Anil Kshetarpal, Advocate,\n           for the appellant.\n\n           Mr.Jitender Singla, Advocate,\n           for the respondent.\n\n                 ****\n\nSABINA, J.\n<\/pre>\n
           Plaintiff-appellant filed a suit for separate possession by<\/p>\n
way of partition and permanent injunction, which was dismissed by<\/p>\n
the Civil Judge (Jr.Divn.), Jagadhari vide judgment and decree dated<\/p>\n
17.2.2005 . In appeal, the said judgment and decree were upheld<\/p>\n
by the Additional District Judge, Jagadhari vide judgment and decree<\/p>\n
dated 14.3.2007. Hence, the present appeal.<\/p>\n
           Brief facts of the case, as noticed by the lower appellate<\/p>\n
Court in para Nos. 2 and 3 of its judgment, are as under:-<\/p>\n
           “2.          The brief facts leading to filing of the present
\n R.S.A.No. 2299 of 2007 (O&M)                                  2<\/span><\/p>\n
         appeal are that the plaintiff who is real uncle of the<\/p>\n
         defendant has filed the present suit against the defendant<\/p>\n
         inter alia on the grounds that the parties to the suit are<\/p>\n
         joint owners of the disputed property. He is owner of 2\/3rd<\/p>\n
         share whereas defendant has 1\/3rd share in the disputed<\/p>\n
         property. The dispute property has not been partitioned<\/p>\n
         by metes and bound and now the plaintiff does not want<\/p>\n
         to keep his share joint with the defendant. He asked the<\/p>\n
         defendant to get the disputed property partitioned, but, he<\/p>\n
         put off the matter on one pretext of the other and<\/p>\n
         ultimately, few days back he was threatened to alienate<\/p>\n
         the specific portion of the disputed property or to change<\/p>\n
         the existing position by raising further construction without<\/p>\n
         right to do so. Hence, this suit.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         3.          On notice, defendant appeared and filed his<\/p>\n
         written statement controverting the claim put forth by the<\/p>\n
         plaintiff. The relationship between the parties has been<\/p>\n
         admitted.    However, it is alleged that the disputed<\/p>\n
         property and other properties belonging to the family was<\/p>\n
         partitioned vide partition deed dated 10.7.1987 and in<\/p>\n
         pursuance thereof the disputed property had fallen to the<\/p>\n
         exclusive lot of Om Parkash, father of the answering<\/p>\n
         defendant and thereafter, the answering defendant has<\/p>\n
         constructed his residential house and established an atta
\n R.S.A.No. 2299 of 2007 (O&M)                                          3<\/span><\/p>\n
            chakki in the disputed property. It is alleged that revenue<\/p>\n
            entries are also in favour of the answering defendant.<\/p>\n
            The plaintiff never objected to construction of residential<\/p>\n
            house or establishment of atta chakki by the answering<\/p>\n
            defendant over the disputed property, but, now after a<\/p>\n
            period of 15 years he has filed the present suit with<\/p>\n
            malafide intention. While denying all the other averments<\/p>\n
            made in the plaint it is alleged that the suit of the plaintiff<\/p>\n
            is not maintainable      and the same is bad for partial<\/p>\n
            partition as whole property of the family has not been<\/p>\n
            included in the suit as well as for non-joinder and mis-<\/p>\n
            joinder of the necessary parties. The plaintiff is guilty of<\/p>\n
            concealment of material facts and has no locus standi to<\/p>\n
            file the present suit. The suit is false and frivolous and is<\/p>\n
            liable to be dismissed with special costs under Section<\/p>\n
            35-A CPC. Thus, dismissal of the suit was prayed for.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n
           On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were<\/p>\n
framed by the trial Court:-\n<\/p>\n
              1. Whether      the   plaintiff   is   entitled   to   separate<\/p>\n
              possession by partition of 2\/3rd share of the suit<\/p>\n
              property? OPP<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
            2. If the above issue is proved, whether the plaintiff is<\/p>\n
              entitled to the relief of permanent injunction? OPP<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
            3. Whether the suit is bad for non-joinder and mis-joinder
\n R.S.A.No. 2299 of 2007 (O&M)                                     4<\/span><\/p>\n
              of parties? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
           4. Whether the suit is not maintainable and liable to be<\/p>\n
              dismissed with special costs? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
           5. Relief.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n
           Learned counsel for the       appellant has submitted that<\/p>\n
there was no dispute regarding the fact that Ex.D-1, alleged family<\/p>\n
partition, could be looked into for collateral purposes as the same<\/p>\n
was not registered.     However, the said family partition had never<\/p>\n
been acted upon. The plaintiff had sold the khasra number which<\/p>\n
had allegedly come to the defendant Om Parkash by way of family<\/p>\n
settlement. From this, it was evident that, in fact, the partition Ex.D-1<\/p>\n
had never been acted upon.\n<\/p>\n
           Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand,<\/p>\n
has submitted that the family partition Ex.D-1 had been duly acted<\/p>\n
upon.\n<\/p>\n
           After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the<\/p>\n
opinion that the present appeal deserves to be dismissed.<\/p>\n
           Learned Additional District Judge, while dealing with the<\/p>\n
argument raised by learned counsel for the appellant, has held as<\/p>\n
under:-\n<\/p>\n
           “35. Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn my<\/p>\n
           attention to certain documents to show that the alleged<\/p>\n
           mutual partition dated 10.7.1987 was never acted upon<\/p>\n
           as all the three brothers have been dealing with the suit
\n R.S.A.No. 2299 of 2007 (O&M)                                5<\/span><\/p>\n
         property.   It is pertinent to mention that during the<\/p>\n
         pendency of the appeal an application was filed by the<\/p>\n
         appellant for leading the additional evidence.         Said<\/p>\n
         application for additional evidence was allowed by my<\/p>\n
         learned Predecessor vide order dated 28.9.2005 and the<\/p>\n
         plaintiff-appellant has produced the documents Ex.P-4 to<\/p>\n
         Ex.P-13 in additional evidence during the pendency of the<\/p>\n
         appeal. Ex.P-4 is the copy of plaint of civil suit No.550<\/p>\n
         filed on 19.7.1995 by defendant Ram Kumar against his<\/p>\n
         father Om Parkash for seeking declaration to the effect<\/p>\n
         that he is owner in possession of the land measuring 2 K-<\/p>\n
         13M being 1\/3rd share of land measuring 8 kanals<\/p>\n
         comprised of khasra No.26\/\/31 (8-0).     In this suit Om<\/p>\n
         Parkash father of the defendant had filed admission<\/p>\n
         written statement, copy Ex.P-5 and the said suit of<\/p>\n
         defendant Ram Kumar was decree vide judgment dated<\/p>\n
         26.9.1995, certified copy Ex.P-6. Certified copy of decree<\/p>\n
         sheet is Ex.P-8. On the basis of this decree mutation<\/p>\n
         No.483 dated 22.11.1995, copy Ex.P-10 was sanctioned<\/p>\n
         in favour of defendant Ram Kumar. These documents<\/p>\n
         cannot show that mutual partition was not acted upon<\/p>\n
         because Om Parkash has transferred 1\/3rd share out of<\/p>\n
         khasra no.26\/\/31 in favour of his son Ram Kumar. It may<\/p>\n
         be possible that Om Parkash might have intended to
\n R.S.A.No. 2299 of 2007 (O&M)                                6<\/span><\/p>\n
         transfer only 1\/3rd share out of this khasra number to his<\/p>\n
         son Ram Kumar. Ex.P-9 is the copy of mutation No.428<\/p>\n
         which shows that Som Dutt has transferred his land in<\/p>\n
         favour of plaintiff Hari Parkash vide civil court decree<\/p>\n
         dated 5.4.1991.   He also transferred 1\/3rd share out of<\/p>\n
         khasra No.26\/\/31 to plaintiff Hari Parkash. There is no<\/p>\n
         evidence to show that defendant Ram Kumar or his father<\/p>\n
         Om Parkash were party to the civil court decree dated<\/p>\n
         5.4.1991 or any notice was given to the defendant or his<\/p>\n
         father Om Parkash at the time of sanctioning of mutation<\/p>\n
         No.428 dated 20.7.1992 on the basis of said decree.<\/p>\n
         Mutation Ex.P-11 shows that plaintiff Hari Parkash has<\/p>\n
         sold his land to Magesh Kumar etc. vide sale deed dated<\/p>\n
         3.12.2003.   Khasra No.26\/\/31 does not figure in this<\/p>\n
         mutation.    Similar is the position regarding mutation<\/p>\n
         No.12 vide which Hari Parkash plaintiff has sold his land<\/p>\n
         to Om Parkash etc. vide sale deed dated 17.12.2003. In<\/p>\n
         this mutation also khasra Number 26\/\/31 does not figure.<\/p>\n
         In the copy of jamabandi Ex.P-13 for the year 2000-2001<\/p>\n
         ownership of the plaintiff has been shown to the extent of<\/p>\n
         2\/3rd share in khasra no.26\/\/31 which is obvious because<\/p>\n
         mutation partition was never reported to the revenue<\/p>\n
         authorities, however, this entire khasra number has been<\/p>\n
         shown in possession of Ram Kumar co-sharer i.e.
\n R.S.A.No. 2299 of 2007 (O&M)                                   7<\/span><\/p>\n
           defendant.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n
           Thus, the appellant had failed to establish that the khasra<\/p>\n
number, which had come to the share of defendant as per Ex.D-1,<\/p>\n
had been sold by the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant<\/p>\n
has failed to counter the observations made by learned Additional<\/p>\n
District Judge.\n<\/p>\n
           No substantial question of law arises in this regular<\/p>\n
second appeal. Accordingly, the same is dismissed.<\/p>\n
                                              (SABINA)
\n                                               JUDGE
\nDecember 17, 2009
\nanita\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Hari Parkash vs Ram Kumar on 17 December, 2009 R.S.A.No. 2299 of 2007 (O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh R.S.A.No. 2299 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision: 17.12.2009 Hari Parkash ……Appellant Versus Ram Kumar …….Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Anil Kshetarpal, Advocate, for the […]<\/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":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-249881","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nHari Parkash vs Ram Kumar on 17 December, 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\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Hari Parkash vs Ram Kumar on 17 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-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=\"2009-12-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-01-27T13:15:07+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\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Hari Parkash vs Ram Kumar on 17 December, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-01-27T13:15:07+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1288,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009\",\"name\":\"Hari Parkash vs Ram Kumar on 17 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-01-27T13:15:07+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Hari Parkash vs Ram Kumar on 17 December, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Hari Parkash vs Ram Kumar on 17 December, 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\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Hari Parkash vs Ram Kumar on 17 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-12-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-01-27T13:15:07+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\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Hari Parkash vs Ram Kumar on 17 December, 2009","datePublished":"2009-12-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-01-27T13:15:07+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009"},"wordCount":1288,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009","name":"Hari Parkash vs Ram Kumar on 17 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-12-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-01-27T13:15:07+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-parkash-vs-ram-kumar-on-17-december-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Hari Parkash vs Ram Kumar on 17 December, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/249881","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=249881"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249881\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=249881"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=249881"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=249881"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}