{"id":253786,"date":"2010-08-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-08-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010"},"modified":"2014-05-11T14:26:22","modified_gmt":"2014-05-11T08:56:22","slug":"akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010","title":{"rendered":"Akhil Joy Aged 9 Years vs Mary George on 16 August, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Akhil Joy Aged 9 Years vs Mary George on 16 August, 2010<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nMACA.No. 252 of 2009()\n\n\n1. AKHIL JOY AGED 9 YEARS,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. MARY GEORGE, MOOLETHADATHIL HOUSE\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. JOJO M.GEORGE, S\/O.GEORGE, MOOLETHADA-\n\n3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.,\n\n4. MANIKUTTAN, S\/O.KRISHNANKUTTY,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.SHEJI P.ABRAHAM\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.K.SAJAN KURIAKOSE\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM\n\n Dated :16\/08\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n      PIUS C.KURIAKOSE &amp; C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ.\n                  ----------------------------------\n                  M.A.C.A. No.252 of 2009\n                  ----------------------------------\n             Dated this the 16th day of August, 2010\n\n\n                           JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">                           &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">Abdul Rehim,J.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">            Claimant before the Tribunal is in appeal seeking<\/p>\n<p>enhancement of the compensation awarded.              The accident<\/p>\n<p>occurred on 31.10.2003 while the claimant, who is a student<\/p>\n<p>aged 9 years was travelling in a Mini Bus. Due to negligent<\/p>\n<p>negotiation of a curve by the driver of the Mini Bus, the<\/p>\n<p>claimant was thrown out from the Bus and sustained very<\/p>\n<p>severe head injury. From the Medical records it is revealed<\/p>\n<p>that the claimant had undergone more than one surgical<\/p>\n<p>procedure.     The claimant was treated as inpatient on two<\/p>\n<p>spells; i.e. from 31.10.2003 to 20.12.2003 and from 4.3.2004<\/p>\n<p>to 16.3.2004.       He continued prolonged treatment as<\/p>\n<p>outpatient thereafter. Ext.A9 Medical Certificate would show<\/p>\n<p>that even after two years the claimant is continuing with<\/p>\n<p>permanent disorders.       Ext.A11 is the disability certificate<\/p>\n<p>which is proved through PW1 Doctor.               Even though stiff<\/p>\n<p>M.A.C.A.252\/09<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">                                2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>opposition was there against accepting Ext.A11, the Tribunal<\/p>\n<p>accepted     50%    permanent    disability  for   computing<\/p>\n<p>compensation for permanent disability. Being a school going<\/p>\n<p>student the Tribunal adopted notional income of Rs.2,500\/-<\/p>\n<p>per month and multiplier of 15. A total compensation of<\/p>\n<p>Rs.3,00,500\/- was awarded by the Tribunal.<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">     2.     Learned counsel for the appellant contended that<\/p>\n<p>the multiplier adopted by the Tribunal is erroneous.      She<\/p>\n<p>placed reliance on a recent decision of the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme<\/p>\n<p>Court in Sarala Varma Vs.Delhi Transport Corporation<\/p>\n<p>(2010 (2) KLT 802 SC). In the said judgment the Hon&#8217;ble<\/p>\n<p>Supreme Court had pointed out that, evidently there are<\/p>\n<p>errors crept in the second schedule of the <a href=\"\/doc\/785258\/\" id=\"a_1\">Motor Vehicles Act<\/a>,<\/p>\n<p>and it requires correction for the purpose of finding out the<\/p>\n<p>correct compensation to be awarded with respect to victims of<\/p>\n<p>different age groups.    But in the operative portion of the<\/p>\n<p>judgment, eventhough there is mention about the correct<\/p>\n<p>multiplier to be adopted in the case of victims of age groups<\/p>\n<p>of 15-20 upto 61-65, it is not mentioned that the multiplier of<\/p>\n<p>15 prescribed for the age group upto 15 years is in any way<\/p>\n<p>erroneous. In the case at hand, the claimant was admittedly<\/p>\n<p>M.A.C.A.252\/09<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">                                3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>aged 9 years at the time of accident. Therefore we are of the<\/p>\n<p>considered opinion that the multiplier of 15 adopted by the<\/p>\n<p>Tribunal is correct. We do not find that the notional income<\/p>\n<p>adopted by the Tribunal is unreasonable. Hence we find no<\/p>\n<p>ground warranting interference with respect to quantum of<\/p>\n<p>compensation awarded under the head of permanent<\/p>\n<p>disability.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">     3.     Learned counsel further argued that compensation<\/p>\n<p>of Rs.25,000\/- awarded under the head of pain and suffering<\/p>\n<p>is too meagre an amount considering the prolonged treatment<\/p>\n<p>undergone and the continuing disability from which the<\/p>\n<p>claimant is suffering even now. It is also pointed out that the<\/p>\n<p>amount of Rs.20,000\/- awarded towards loss of amenities and<\/p>\n<p>enjoyment in life is also highly insufficient.    Considering<\/p>\n<p>severe nature of the injuries sustained and also considering<\/p>\n<p>history of the prolonged treatment, we are of the opinion that<\/p>\n<p>enhancement of compensation under those heads by a sum of<\/p>\n<p>Rs.25,000\/- will meet the ends of justice. We do not find any<\/p>\n<p>ground for enhancement of the compensation awarded under<\/p>\n<p>different other heads.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">     4.     Learned counsel for the appellant points out that<\/p>\n<p>M.A.C.A.252\/09<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_2\">                                 4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>there is a mistake occurred in computing (in adding) the total<\/p>\n<p>figure of compensation. On a re-computation of the amounts<\/p>\n<p>awarded under different heads, we are convinced that the<\/p>\n<p>total amount will come to Rs.3,74,479\/-, instead of the amount<\/p>\n<p>of Rs.3,00,500\/- mentioned in the Award. The Award should<\/p>\n<p>be corrected to the above extent.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">      5.    In the result the appeal is partly allowed enhancing<\/p>\n<p>the compensation awarded by the Tribunal by a further sum<\/p>\n<p>of Rs.25,000\/- and also re-fixing the total amount at<\/p>\n<p>Rs.3,99,479\/- (3,74,479 + 25,000).        The total amount of<\/p>\n<p>compensation will carry interest at the rate of 10% from the<\/p>\n<p>date of application till payment.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">      6.    The 3rd respondent Insurance Company is directed<\/p>\n<p>to make payment of the award amount within a period of two<\/p>\n<p>months from today.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">\n<p id=\"p_9\">                           PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_10\">\n<p>                            C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_11\">okb<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Akhil Joy Aged 9 Years vs Mary George on 16 August, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM MACA.No. 252 of 2009() 1. AKHIL JOY AGED 9 YEARS, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. MARY GEORGE, MOOLETHADATHIL HOUSE &#8230; Respondent 2. JOJO M.GEORGE, S\/O.GEORGE, MOOLETHADA- 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., 4. MANIKUTTAN, [&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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-253786","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Akhil Joy Aged 9 Years vs Mary George on 16 August, 2010 - 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\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Akhil Joy Aged 9 Years vs Mary George on 16 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-08-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-05-11T08:56:22+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=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Akhil Joy Aged 9 Years vs Mary George on 16 August, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-05-11T08:56:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010\"},\"wordCount\":687,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010\",\"name\":\"Akhil Joy Aged 9 Years vs Mary George on 16 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-05-11T08:56:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Akhil Joy Aged 9 Years vs Mary George on 16 August, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Akhil Joy Aged 9 Years vs Mary George on 16 August, 2010 - 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\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Akhil Joy Aged 9 Years vs Mary George on 16 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-08-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-05-11T08:56:22+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Akhil Joy Aged 9 Years vs Mary George on 16 August, 2010","datePublished":"2010-08-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-05-11T08:56:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010"},"wordCount":687,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010","name":"Akhil Joy Aged 9 Years vs Mary George on 16 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-08-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-05-11T08:56:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhil-joy-aged-9-years-vs-mary-george-on-16-august-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Akhil Joy Aged 9 Years vs Mary George on 16 August, 2010"}]},{"@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\/253786","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=253786"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/253786\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=253786"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=253786"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=253786"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}