{"id":25419,"date":"2010-08-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-08-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010"},"modified":"2014-09-03T12:21:36","modified_gmt":"2014-09-03T06:51:36","slug":"the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010","title":{"rendered":"The Branch Manager vs R. Murugan on 18 August, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
The Branch Manager vs R. Murugan on 18 August, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED : 18.08.2010\n\nC O R A M\n\nTHE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN\n\nC.M.A. No. 2438 of 2007\n\nThe Branch Manager\nCholamandalam MS General Insurance \n Company Limited\nT.B. Road\nCoimbatore\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t.. Appellant\n\nVersus\n\n1. R. Murugan\n2. C. Govindasamy\t\t\t\t\t\t\t.. Respondents\n\n \t Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the Judgment and Decree dated 22.03.2007 made in MCOP No. 527 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chief Judicial Magistrate No.II, Dharmapuri.\n\nFor Appellants \t\t:\tMr. N. Vijayaraghavan\nFor Respondent \t\t:\tMr. V.R. Shanmuganathan for R1\n\t\t\t\t\tR2 set exparte\n\t\nJUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
\tThe appellant insurance company has come forward with this appeal as against a dubious claim made by an advocate clerk\/first respondent herein for the alleged injuries sustained by him in a road accident.  The appellant is specifically aggrieved by the grant of compensation of Rs.2,12,400\/- in favour of the claimant\/first respondent herein as against Rs.4,00,000\/- claimed by him in the claim petition.\n<\/p>\n
\t2. \tThe facts of the case was that on 06.12.2005 at about 20.45 hours, when the claimant\/first respondent herein was proceeding in his bicycle slowly, in Raja Veedhi, Krishnagiri Town, near Mariamman Koil Street, the driver of the Yamaha Motor Cycle bearing Registration No. TN-29-R-5353 belonging to the first respondent in the claim petition, was driven by him in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the claimant\/first respondent herein.  In the impact, the claimant\/first respondent herein said to have sustained certain injuries, as mentioned in column No.11 of the claim petition, which are extracted hereunder:-\n<\/p>\n
 “11. Nature of injuries sustained:-\n<\/p>\n
1.    \tSwelling, contusion, tenderness over right  \tforearm\n<\/p>\n
2.   \t2 X 2 cm, abrasion Rt. Shoulder with contusion  \tand swelling\n<\/p>\n
3.  \t2 X 1 cm abrasion over right ankle\n<\/p>\n
4.  \tContusion, tenderness at right side chest\n<\/p>\n
5.  \tMultiple injuries all over the body.\n<\/p>\n
    \tX-ray elbow with forearm shows : Fracture right  \tforearm.”\n<\/p>\n
\t3. \tIt is stated that for the aforesaid injuries, the claimant has taken treatment in a private hospital and later on he was admitted in Government hospital at Dharmapuri where he was admitted as an in-patient.  According to the claimant, at the time of accident, he was 33 years old, working as an Advocate clerk and earning a sum of Rs.6,000\/- per month. Therefore, for the injuries sustained in the accident, he filed the claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.4,00,000\/-.\n<\/p>\n
\t4. \tBefore the court below, the claimant examined himself as PW1 and Dr. Gandhi as PW2, besides Exs. P1 to P6 were marked.  On behalf of the respondents in the claim petition, no document was marked or witness examined.  The court below, taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence awarded a sum of Rs.2,12,400\/- as compensation which is questioned in this appeal by the insurance company.\n<\/p>\n
\t5. \tThe learned counsel for the appellant mainly contended that in a case of injury, the court below ought not to have applied multiplier theorey to award an exorbitant sum of Rs.2,12,400\/- as compensation.  Moreover, the claimant has exaggerated the monthly income at Rs.6,000\/- per month as an advocate clerk.  In any event, the award passed by the court below is not in accordance with law.\n<\/p>\n
\t6. \tHeard both sides.  It is seen from column No.11 of the claim petition that the claimant said to have sustained only Swelling, contusion, tenderness over right  forearm and other parts of his body, but it is not known as to how or on what basis the court below arrived at the conclusion that the claimant had sustained fracture injuries in the fore arm.  The claimant has not produced any records to show that he sustained fracture injury.  In fact, if the wound certificate issued by the Government Hospital on 07.12.2005 is perused, it will disclose that the claimant sustained various injuries out of which injury No.1 is greivous.  Injury No.1 in the wound certificate disclose that the claimant had sustained swelling, contusion, tenderness over the right arm and therefore, based on the wound certificate also, it cannot be stated that the claimant had sustained any fracture injury.  Whereas, PW2, the Doctor, in his evidence has stated that the claimant sustained injuries in the right hand forearm and taken treatment for one day.  PW2 only says that he did not treat the claimant or the X-ray was not taken at the time of accident. All that PW2 says is that due to the accident, the claimant could not lift any weight, but, he assessed the disability of the claimant at 35%.  Inasmuch as the Doctor, PW2 in his evidence has also not deposed as to whether the claimant had suffered any fracture injury, the disability assessed by PW2 at 35% appears to be exaggerated.  It is unfortunate that the Doctor has assessed the disability certificate assessing the disability of the claimant at 35% without any valid reason.  Therefore, the evidence of PW2 cannot be given much credence.\n<\/p>\n
 \t7. \tIn the cross examination of the claimant, as PW1, he would categorically admit that he got a cycle as well as TVS 50 Moped and he is still using those vehicles as before and he has been continuing his work as advocate clerk as before.  Therefore, it is evident that the claimant has not sustained any loss of income owing to the accident.   The claimant has also not proved as to whether he suffered disability or loss of income due to the accident.  Further, it is also not proved as to what exactly the difficulty being faced by the claimant pursuant to the accident.  Whereas, the claimant deposed that even after the accident, he continues his profession as Advocate Clerk.  But unfortunately, the court below, without considering any of the above aspects, awarded compensation by applying multiplier theorey, which is legally impermissible.\n<\/p>\n
\t8. \tFrom the above discussion, it is clear that the claimant, utilising his position as an Advocate Clerk in the Court, has sought for exorbitant compensation for the simple or minor injuries sustained by him. The Court below also, without considering as to whether the claimant is entitled for such higher compensation, has applied multiplier theorey in a case of injury and awarded a huge sum of Rs.2,12,400\/- as compensation.  It is also brought to the notice of this Court by the learned counsel for the appellant that the claimant\/first respondent herein has already withdrawn a sum of Rs.50,000\/- deposited by the insurance company during the pendency of this appeal.  The learned counsel for the claimant\/first respondent brought to the notice of this Court that the claimant had withdrawn only 50,000\/- and the balance amount remains in the court deposit.\n<\/p>\n
\t9. \tIn view of the above discussion, for the minor injuries sustained by the claimant in the road accident, this Court feels that a lump sum compensation of Rs.50,000\/- can be awarded to the claimant, which amount was already withdrawn by the claimant.  However, it is made clear that if any amount was withdrawn by the claimant over and above Rs.50,000\/- the same shall be recovered by the appellant in accordance with law or it shall be repaid by the claimant\/first respondent herein to the insurance company.\n<\/p>\n
\t10. \tIn the result, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed to the extent indicated above.  No costs.  The compensation amount awarded by the court below is reduced from Rs.2,12,400\/- to Rs.50,000\/-. The insurance company is permitted to withdraw the balance amount with accrued interest.\n<\/p>\n
rsh<\/p>\n
To<\/p>\n
The Chief Judicial Magistrate No.II
\nMotor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
\nDharmapuri<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court The Branch Manager vs R. Murugan on 18 August, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 18.08.2010 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN C.M.A. No. 2438 of 2007 The Branch Manager Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited T.B. Road Coimbatore .. Appellant Versus 1. […]<\/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-25419","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Branch Manager vs R. Murugan on 18 August, 2010 - 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\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Branch Manager vs R. Murugan on 18 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-09-03T06:51:36+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Branch Manager vs R. Murugan on 18 August, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-09-03T06:51:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1159,\"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\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010\",\"name\":\"The Branch Manager vs R. Murugan on 18 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-09-03T06:51:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Branch Manager vs R. Murugan on 18 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":"The Branch Manager vs R. Murugan on 18 August, 2010 - 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\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Branch Manager vs R. Murugan on 18 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-09-03T06:51:36+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Branch Manager vs R. Murugan on 18 August, 2010","datePublished":"2010-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-09-03T06:51:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010"},"wordCount":1159,"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\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010","name":"The Branch Manager vs R. Murugan on 18 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-09-03T06:51:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-branch-manager-vs-r-murugan-on-18-august-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Branch Manager vs R. Murugan on 18 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\/25419","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=25419"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25419\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25419"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25419"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25419"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}