{"id":254753,"date":"1970-01-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1969-12-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial"},"modified":"2018-10-27T19:15:08","modified_gmt":"2018-10-27T13:45:08","slug":"paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial","title":{"rendered":"Paulson vs Kovilakam Chits & Financial …"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Paulson vs Kovilakam Chits & Financial …<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nOP(C).No. 429 of 2010(O)\n\n\n1. PAULSON, S\/O.ARAIKKAL JOSEPH,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. KOVILAKAM CHITS & FINANCIAL SERVICES\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. CLAMENT,\n\n3. LIYO, S\/O.THALAKKOTTOOR VINCENT,\n\n4. JOHNSON, S\/O.THALAKKOOTTOOR VINCENT,\n\n5. GEORGE,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH\n\n Dated :\/  \/\n\n O R D E R\n                  THOMAS P JOSEPH, J.\n\n                 ----------------------------------------\n\n                     O.P(C).No.429 of 2010\n\n                 ---------------------------------------\n\n              Dated this 22nd day of October, 2010\n\n                           JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
      Defendant in O.S.No.896 of 2002 of the court of learned<\/p>\n
Sub Judge, Thrissur is the petitioner before me challenging<\/p>\n
Exts.P3 and P4, orders. That was a suit for recovery of money<\/p>\n
which was decided ex parte, in the absence of petitioner.<\/p>\n
Petitioner filed Ext.P1, application to set aside the ex parte<\/p>\n
decree and judgment and Ext.P2, application to condone the<\/p>\n
delay of 466 days. Learned Sub Judge dismissed Exts.P1 and P2,<\/p>\n
applications as per Exts.P3 and P4, orders dated February 3,<\/p>\n
2010. Vide Ext.P4, I.A.No.2533 of 2009 (Ext.P2) for condonation<\/p>\n
of delay has been dismissed stating reasons and consequently<\/p>\n
Ext.P1, application (I.A.No.2532 of 2009) to set aside the ex parte<\/p>\n
decree has also been dismissed. The said orders are under<\/p>\n
challenge under Article 227<\/a> of the Constitution.<\/p>\n
      2.   I have heard counsel on the sustainability and<\/p>\n
maintainability of this petition          under Article 227<\/a> of the<\/p>\n
Constitution. Learned counsel placing reliance on the decision in<\/p>\n
Jayakurmari Vs. Ismail Rawther (2001(2) KLT 551)<\/p>\n
contends that the order dismissing an application to condone the<\/p>\n
O.P(C).No.429 of 2010
\n                                 : 2 :<\/span><\/p>\n
delay is amenable to the supervisory jurisdiction of this court<\/p>\n
under Article 227<\/a> of the Constitution. Hence the challenge to that<\/p>\n
order is maintainable. It is also contended that since the reason<\/p>\n
for dismissal of the application to set aside the ex parte decree is<\/p>\n
the refusal to condone the delay, dismissal of the application to<\/p>\n
set aside the ex parte decree must be taken as a consequential<\/p>\n
order following dismissal of the application to condone the delay<\/p>\n
and hence in the light of the decision in Jayakurmari Vs. Ismail<\/p>\n
Rawther (supra), petition under Article 227<\/a> of the Constitution<\/p>\n
is maintainable.\n<\/p>\n
      3.    No doubt, an order refusing to condone the delay by<\/p>\n
itself is amenable to the supervisory jurisdiction of this court<\/p>\n
under Article 227<\/a> of the Constitution but, I must bear in mind<\/p>\n
that the said application is filed in an application to set aside the<\/p>\n
ex parte decree. In other words the main relief prayed for is to<\/p>\n
set aside the ex parte decree and, that application is<\/p>\n
maintainable on its own. It is only that since that application is<\/p>\n
not preferred within the prescribed time, petitioner has filed an<\/p>\n
application to condone the delay in filing that application so that,<\/p>\n
if delay is condoned the application to set aside the ex parte<\/p>\n
decree becomes in order.      Therefore, contention that dismissal<\/p>\n
O.P(C).No.429 of 2010
\n                                : 3 :<\/span><\/p>\n
of the application to set aside the ex parte decree is something<\/p>\n
that follows the dismissal of application to condone the delay<\/p>\n
cannot be accepted. Dismissal of application to set aside the ex<\/p>\n
parte decree is subject to an appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(d)<\/p>\n
of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, “the Code”). Position<\/p>\n
may be different where the application is to condone the delay is<\/p>\n
dismissed, that order is under challenge in this court in exercise<\/p>\n
of supervisory power under Article 227<\/a> of the Constitution and in<\/p>\n
the meantime, the application to set aside the ex parte decree is<\/p>\n
also dismissed.      Here, dismissal of both the applications is<\/p>\n
simultaneous. In such a situation, remedy of petitioner is to<\/p>\n
challenge dismissal of the application to set aside the ex parte<\/p>\n
decree under Order XLIII, Rule 1(d) of the Code. That, an appeal<\/p>\n
in such a situation is maintainable against the order refusing to<\/p>\n
set aside the ex parte decree is held by this court in<\/p>\n
Lakshmikutty Panickathi Vs. Bhargavi Panickathi (1987<\/p>\n
(2) KLT 562) . In that decision it has been held that merely<\/p>\n
because the reason for rejection (of the application to set aside<\/p>\n
the dismissal of suit in that case) is the delay consequent to the<\/p>\n
rejection of the delay condonation petition in the absence of<\/p>\n
sufficient reason the order does not cease it to be an order under<\/p>\n
O.P(C).No.429 of 2010
\n                                : 4 :<\/span><\/p>\n
Order IX, Rule 9 of the Code. Same principle is applicable to<\/p>\n
dismissal of the application under Order IX, Rule 13 of the Code<\/p>\n
as well.\n<\/p>\n
      4.    A direct authority on the point is Lilly Vs. Rajesh<\/p>\n
(2004(3) KLT 712).         There, referring to the decision in<\/p>\n
Jayakurmari Vs. Ismail Rawther (supra) it has been held that<\/p>\n
where an application to condone the delay and to set aside ex<\/p>\n
parte decree are dismissed simultaneously remedy available to<\/p>\n
the party is to file an appeal under Order XLIII, Rule 1(d) of the<\/p>\n
Code against the application refusing to set aside the ex parte<\/p>\n
decree.\n<\/p>\n
      5.    Another decision on the point is an unreported<\/p>\n
decision dated January 19, 2007 in unnumbered W.P.C.——- of<\/p>\n
2007 where also the same view has been taken. Yet another<\/p>\n
decision is C.K. Thoma & Co. Vs. Muthoot Leasing and<\/p>\n
Finance Ltd. (2007(2) KLT 32). There, it has been held that<\/p>\n
even if the application under Order IX, Rule 13 of the Code was<\/p>\n
dismissed consequent to dismissal of the application filed under<\/p>\n
Sec.5 of the Limitation Act (to condone the delay), nevertheless it<\/p>\n
is an order in the application under Rule 13 of Order IX of the<\/p>\n
Code. In view of the above authorities, since the applications to<\/p>\n
O.P(C).No.429 of 2010
\n                                 : 5 :<\/span><\/p>\n
condone the delay as well as to set aside the ex parte decree have<\/p>\n
been dismissed by the court below simultaneously, remedy of<\/p>\n
petitioner is not to file a petition under Article 227<\/a> of the<\/p>\n
Constitution against the order dismissing the application to<\/p>\n
condone the delay but, to prefer appeal against the order<\/p>\n
dismissing the application to set aside the ex parte decree as<\/p>\n
provided under Order XLIII, Rule 1(d) of the Code and in that<\/p>\n
appeal challenge correctness of the order dismissing application<\/p>\n
to condone the delay.\n<\/p>\n
      Resultantly this petition is dismissed but, without prejudice<\/p>\n
to the right of petitioner to challenge the order declining to set<\/p>\n
aside the ex parte decree under Order XLIII, Rule 1(d) of the<\/p>\n
Code and in that appeal challenge correctness of the order<\/p>\n
refusing to condone the delay.\n<\/p>\n
\n
                              (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE)<\/p>\n
Sbna\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Paulson vs Kovilakam Chits & Financial … IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM OP(C).No. 429 of 2010(O) 1. PAULSON, S\/O.ARAIKKAL JOSEPH, … Petitioner Vs 1. KOVILAKAM CHITS & FINANCIAL SERVICES … Respondent 2. CLAMENT, 3. LIYO, S\/O.THALAKKOTTOOR VINCENT, 4. JOHNSON, S\/O.THALAKKOOTTOOR VINCENT, 5. GEORGE, For Petitioner :SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN For Respondent […]<\/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-254753","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nPaulson vs Kovilakam Chits & Financial ... - 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\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Paulson vs Kovilakam Chits & Financial ... - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial\" \/>\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=\"1969-12-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-27T13:45:08+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Paulson vs Kovilakam Chits & Financial …\",\"datePublished\":\"1969-12-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-27T13:45:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial\"},\"wordCount\":996,\"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\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial\",\"name\":\"Paulson vs Kovilakam Chits & Financial ... - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1969-12-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-27T13:45:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Paulson vs Kovilakam Chits & Financial …\"}]},{\"@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":"Paulson vs Kovilakam Chits & Financial ... - 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\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Paulson vs Kovilakam Chits & Financial ... - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1969-12-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-27T13:45:08+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Paulson vs Kovilakam Chits & Financial …","datePublished":"1969-12-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-27T13:45:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial"},"wordCount":996,"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\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial","name":"Paulson vs Kovilakam Chits & Financial ... - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1969-12-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-27T13:45:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/paulson-vs-kovilakam-chits-financial#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Paulson vs Kovilakam Chits & Financial …"}]},{"@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\/254753","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=254753"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/254753\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=254753"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=254753"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=254753"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}