{"id":255017,"date":"2008-03-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-03-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008"},"modified":"2014-05-10T11:44:59","modified_gmt":"2014-05-10T06:14:59","slug":"new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008","title":{"rendered":"New Generation Apparels vs Union Of India on 12 March, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
New Generation Apparels vs Union Of India on 12 March, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy<\/div>\n
1...:\n\nTHE norrnm MR.    i ,\n\nwan' I-n'.gm__o1 5 ..; __\n\nNEW GENERATION ARPARELS  E '\n\n28-E, PEENYA;INDLiS'Tl?\u00a3}AL-H;.:*.._ 1  .\n\nAREA 11 P1iAs3E, '.BANGAL~.\u20ac)RE  53. \n\nREP      .\n\n      PETITIONER\n\n1 E'r1ioN.OEIm)L\u00bb{\n5 \"  REP'-m\"ITs SECY\n_ }.d_INIS'PR\u00a5mQP-\"TEXTILES\n  A sgugea B1-!.A.VA1\\!' Q\n DELHI - 110 011\n\n\" E 1    ' AEEECDND APPELLATEE-COMMITTEE\n\n ' '3FZ}V'ERNMENT  iN_DiA\n E. MINISTRY \"OF .TE_XT_l_LES\n\n'  EXPORTS-III SECTION\"\nUDYOG BHAVAN\nNEW DELHI - 110 011\nRE-P.BY ITS -JQINT SEER- ,ARY\n8!. CHAIRMAN\n\n3 APPARELEXPORT PROMOTION-'COUNCIL\n10. RAiiE;_.__J'A-r3_HAiviBERS-- E E\n12 MUSEUM ROAD, ; .- Arxk\n\n\n\nE0\n\nD A RIIIAI f\\'[)Ii'\nDru! \\.Il'1IJ\\JI\\l.'.l'G 1\n\nREP.BY ITS JOINT DIRECTOR.\n\n(BY SR1: N oavamss, Sr.CGSC-\"FOR _\nM KBOPAIAH, case Fo1~:a1-:21 f; ' 9     \n[By Sri : K SACHINDRA KARANTH, ADV FOR R3 .9 y   _\nTHIS  :>m1T1oi.lN;9:}s.:9li1;*1LF;;o  5319:9955 993\nAND 227 01? THE CONSTITUTION O1-HNIJIA FRAYING T0\ngames woe ANX.   Pageants? 2 AHD\nTHIS PETITIOIS, 'lecoiaiiie 9\"o\"Nli9o_;roR ORDERS. THIS\non THE comm Mi\ufb01DE\"I'\u00a5HE sooyaougnuo: ~\n\n_ __  _garment exporter when\n  under the New Investors\n\n  country category EU--6, 8, 340\n\n  1\u00a7\u00a7'I6. in terms of the noti\ufb01cation dated 22-\n\n' .- IIUIHII -'.-.__......._ _ .,\n9...; .-u*..k...;.9.;*. .~......... '..... ' '\n sii'::i-':'.l   maul\" 5 11': the Ape} .'\u00a7'.x}:o:'t P:'J\"...'}Gt'.0l1\n\n for short\"). 'Bangalore, after a show cause\n\n _ _ ndece forfe_iting_ Rs.3.77,056\/- by older dated 3-9-1997\n\nit *  ilnmemue-\"B\", which when carried in appeal, the First\n\nAppellate Committee by order dated 31-10-2000 Annexume-\n\"C\", oon\ufb01rmed the order and dismissed the appeal which\n\nM\n\n.-- -- E<"fi'-:Si'a'.):'-\u00a7fo3_N'i':-3 "  \n\n\n\nL.\n3\n\ns' - \ufb01e'. by emer dat... 30-712-2\n\n\u00a7:\n\nthe 'Second i\\ppeilate?C'o1nmitfee. i-lenee,--i:l*;ie'i \u00abmi; .. 'V\n\n2. Petition is opposed by  l\n\ndated. -5-'.7-2r.ao4 of Reewaentg 1 "age 12_lend'..;Stateinent"0f\n\n..1.:.... '........ .1...  ' '  ' .7\nuu ~'ci nu uuted 2l..={}'-u=2'.\u00a5.'4%..e\u00a3. ..-e.e;r.*r.de12t Me.-3. In the\n\nStatement of ob-jec\ufb01ons 'a_i'}.ne"* "j"-f;'l*'1t 116.} an 4, ' is _\n\ncontended eindiieieihing fmm india is\nbasal     into between\n  _    of developed\n ihei\u00b0aeg_is of the erstwhile Mul\ufb01 Fibre-\n\n  inter.na\ufb01onal_ textile trade from\n\npine 3,rear.l1'~.)'?fl; l.T1ie  'Importing countries  referred\n\n \u00ab , _   'QI.=",_L eeu1J.ries_:" who have placed meetrainta on import\n\n  tcnuw ea\u00a3gu..'...e "Q_....._a iteme" '.I:i*.....l\ufb01" the\n\nIII.-..-.du\nIll!!!-\n\n n J uieebmmg into force of-the World Trade (imam. isa\ufb01on we"-re)\n\nll *   1995, quantitative restrictions known as "Import quotas"\n\nin the bilateral agieements were changed under the WTO\nrelating to'Ag;:e-ement on Textiles and Clothing (ATC). The\n\nquotes also known as export entitlements are \n\nUK\n\n\n\nurnnn\ufb02nt -nn\ufb02jui uni g_x-[V1-r-far'-3' far  \n\nwas-J IoII-'I-I I-I\\J'C Inna\n\naiiocaiion of quotas is i'rni"mu}atr:c': so   'ts.-. \n\nexport revenue in the economic   1. it is t ' --\n\nstated that in furthemzncecf. the  'ailn. the  ct'\nIndia framed policies from' to time  ugxpoft\nEntitlement (Quota};::4'Pc\ufb01oieo';\u00a7:_    quotas are\nmainly done under__    in case of\n\nIeadymade" genjiente: \n    Ol\u00e9t' past performance of the\n\nV _A  node: the Past Perfonnance entitiement\n\n_ 4' {P?E_i; .c__ V   .,\n\n "1S%..tiuo"tatb:ased on new investments made for\n\n'  modemiza\ufb01on of machinery under the New\n\n--e4VA'i3:.vestors Eniitiement EM"). to eiicoiirage\n\neeetanente 111. mdustzy;\n\n E? 'L\n\n .0} 35% under Non---quota export (NOE) entitlement to\n\u00abV encourage diversi\ufb01cation of exports in non--quott-1\n\nmuntnes;\n\nd) 10% on First Come First Sexve (FCF-S) to provide\n\nequal opportunities to ali exporters on 'basis 0'' iiagn \\\n\n'I l'._'I..\n\nv 'e Realisairion. \n\n\n\n(31\n\nThe \ufb01sinirig of 'wlieies, it is m=1......'...r|, is. in of igugr\ufb01wer\n\nconferred under Section 5<\/a> of the Foreign  {De-i.iel,.}:-Inen- \"\n\nand Regulation) Act<\/a>, 1992 (No.2? of1?99i23t}  F\n\nAppendix-I Schedule-2 of\u00bbiT{_3 (HiS)_v.i(1lassi\ufb01eo;stioni' \nand Import: published  it\nis further stated    tlie policy, an\nApparel Expolt  s%ill(AEPe) headed by\nDirector    .. (luota Administering\n    responsible for\n     The availability of\nquot' it it is  the demand and in  of\n\nthe xestzieted 'vavsil-emility. commands a  Major\n\n  garments being the quota countries, it is\n\nV \"   ensure quotas are fully utilised and are not\n\n   go waste due to speculative trading by\n\niunsertipulous elements and therefore, the policy envisages\n\nit I '\u00bbuti.'.i%.Lo.. -1' Le quota by 30\"' September of the relevant\n\nyear and failure m do so;  exporter is required to\n\nsurrender the q\"ota 'Md seek n-,vs1_id.etion of unutilised\n\nquota allocated in the categoiies. in the sex' and\n\ngj\u00e9g\n\n\n\n{III\n\nprof.-edm as laid down in the p..nLe},r. -ef quota\n\nbeyond 30*' September and 'Tun  \"\n\nrelevant year is in the form of};  ofap \n\ndeposit receipt or Demand  the  \ntill the year 2000. star   of EMD\nby a letter of ~-datettteheegues. The\ncondition   an exporter who\nexports    of entitlement, its EMD\nshall    of utilisation upto 75% of\n   in 9--.. of slow moving\nit:-.n*:s.:    pioportio\" to the shortfall of\n\n12'\n\nVu_tj]:izat:ic.-n.\"  S  is aggrieved by any outer ox\n\n'im:;;gime,p  an appeal to the F'i;rst Appellate\n\n'   'V  and thereafter to a Second Appellate Comxnittee.\n\n ' 3}' 'T'i1e.Statement-of o'o_jeotions of the \u00a3'r~ res\"-_*nden.\n\n x   almost identical contentions as am advanced by\n\n* . fiaespondent Nos.1 85 2 in their Statement of objections. 'In\n\naddition. it is oontended that the exporter having taken the\nbene\ufb01t of the gannent export. entitlement policy, sought for\n\nextension of time by fu1_'nish1'ng a bank  and having\n\nink\n\n\n\n to esrport \"ar'\"\u00b0ats in re\"-' \"V *'\"' .'7'1V'_.\"'***uV_\"'*--.'.\"\u00a3-\"\"=.'--i.'_\"\n\ncannot be  to appmbate and   is e \n\nthat the petitioner is estopped   :'no\"---\n\namount could be forfeited.'     file \u00a7\u00a7'\u00a2\nrespondent is that the     relevant<\/pre>\n
matexial in support   <\/p>\n
4. Leone  ed  pe\ufb01\ufb01oner advances the
\n\ufb01n-llowm’  . i <\/p>\n
_ ____ Ha) :t__1ie  for forfeiture of the
\neaifxlestiiioiaeyf ‘(a1epoeit,___i11_  entirety. for exports less than
\n7:’5%a’11ci Vp1’oporiion\u00a7ii.*;4:’ibii””‘r’*e r “””‘i”” ‘oetmeen ‘3’.’5%<\/p>\n
ane  s:;~.~s.ses+.r.~… En’*1P- .1I.t(NIE-i ‘ <\/p>\n
\u00bb  e.unreasso1_i-able. ‘<\/p>\n
 appeiiate authority feii in error in riot<\/p>\n
  :5’:-1.:-u_1-It-U|.u.~I5’I’l:rIVIr nun\ufb02nnnn   <\/p>\n
V 1.51 u.Uhu.|.uu1..u.n.IJ |aVl\\:I\\rl.|\\.n..r<\/p>\n
‘   support of the claim of foroe-majeure, while<\/p>\n
 ibrteiture of the EMU.\n<\/p>\n
c] that the petitioner having exported garments uptao
\n62.25% of the export entitlement. the non performance. Was<\/p>\n
‘of d” to   but for masons bewnd its m.,..n…..l<\/p>\n
\ufb02l<\/p>\n
{W<\/p>\n
…} .11: e.:=.=.rlie. c1.eei_i_n_ in appeals invoivinfg .i\u00a7le1_1t1ea1<\/p>\n
issues and identical set of facts, the gnthgarag-my’
\nacoepted the claim of tome-ma,je*a1e\u00bb,.oannot 4ie\ufb011se”to:~ao1epte. <\/p>\n
the petitioner’s claim of fome–majeuIe in   of <\/p>\n
this case.\n<\/p>\n
5. Per ec.*n*.:*<.-:.,;_.  G.L. Rawal
\nfor 'Respof|""t P\u20aco\u00a73.V'u  .;.l\\1'V'V:"'9!-_H.'i.'.'\u00bb1|l.\u20ac challenge to the
\npolicy is   as the ['\u00a7u'i"1'I.':6""iS
\nthe gubta allotted to it
\nthe  for Ievalidation of
\ntl1e__..t__l:;e period, by \ufb01ling an application in
\nthe  "X11 to the policy, and a Bank<\/p>\n
   the proforma Annexme-VI to the policy.<\/p>\n
  to the learned Senior counsel. in terms of the<\/p>\n
   we… fI.I.1_!y  of the eonsequenoes of<\/p>\n
 i'""u':'""t'""' '*1' Bank "tzaraneee on jail-.:re to<\/p>\n
T  gannents upto 90% but not iess  75%, and<\/p>\n
3 =  j\ufb01aitfeitlxle in full if less than 75%. Petitioner having accepted<\/p>\n
the terms of Ievalzidation. it is a11;ued._ cannot be heard to
\ncontend that the  in so far as it Ieiates to forfeiture is<\/p>\n
either irrational or unreasonable. Learned Senior counsel
\nR<\/p>\n
PM<\/p>\n
\u00a313<\/p>\n
.l'.'_-,_A.'Ih<\/p>\n
mrmer oontends th<\/p>\n
E?\n<\/p>\n
E
\nt:\n<\/p>\n
nwnt-*_….-n V~.e-.-_e:~e_the<\/p>\n
vaii\ufb02ity of the policy, when  \u00abonset “of’\\’~–<\/p>\n
GOKALDAS IMAGES umEnvs,.’umorqe iotrxnxaoga.’  V<\/p>\n
learned Single Judge of the   of
\nplea in the decision   me 347 (DEC).
\nLearned Senior   contends that the
\npetitioner   constituting
\nenbetnntiel     force-majeure, the
\n  rejetsted. the said plea.\n<\/p>\n
magitee ‘!_1’4i’e~s,i:’ 5…..,”a..—– ~,~.e.;..; 1- .._.;..g ..m:+……
\n  o_”_ the export eniitiement. the<\/p>\n
sruthoxitieo’  in directing forfeiture of the<\/p>\n
  ‘out of the bank guarantee. in full.<\/p>\n
 A  f\ufb01ii. Devaairee. learned Senior mane:-.1 \ufb01r<\/p>\n
“”\u00abRee1ion,ti’ente 1 Be 2 contends   petitioner having.<\/p>\n
 x   an allotment of a quota to export garments un\ufb02er<\/p>\n
”  the policy, without questioning the terms and conditions of<\/p>\n
invalidation, cannot be permitted to approbate and Ieprobate
\nby calling in question the policy that too. after short export<\/p>\n
of garments. Aooording to the  Senior counsel, quota<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
5…:\n<\/p>\n
CD<\/p>\n
for expo\ufb01 of 3*”! eats 6i”_:% %t*..:-;-‘.. m an_.r.;i_t”1’,-<\/p>\n
E;\n<\/p>\n
‘-…__.n.:\n<\/p>\n
presumed that the exporter wouitiAApdischeI1\u00a7e\u00bb–   am<\/p>\n
‘i<\/p>\n
export garments to ful\ufb01ll the    toiw
\nesnsure such oompl_iance.,9th.e
\nof me amounts from out     stated
\ntherein cannot v\ufb02as either  or
\nunreasonable    to. add that
\ngs;-me-.t      quotas
\n   the pom is to
\nthrew;   ==.:r~..–….:e-Lag to t..e 1-.-.a_m.-:_~
\nseam;    its  ‘pwvide for<\/p>\n
fotfeituie of the guarantee,_. soas to ensure fuii and<\/p>\n
  of the quota and that is precisely what<\/p>\n
V ” VA   <\/p>\n
 ‘ 7 “Having heani the iearned oounsei for the ‘parties.<\/p>\n
 at   the pleadings. there can he no more dispute that in<\/p>\n
V ”   of the ‘Policy’. the petitioner applied for and <\/p>\n
allotment of quotas to export _gam_1en_ts and  to-
\ndo so within the time speci\ufb01ed.  -sought for and<\/p>\n
obtained Ievalidation of the gt__1otas.’_de_sp_ite whic_h- the_q\u00a71\u00a23tas –<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
,L…\n<\/p>\n
vu ~-\n<\/p>\n
\n
pa
\np-I<\/p>\n
remained  ne m nenewrfenraenee ‘.’.i’5<\/p>\n
obligation, in its entirety, despite the  –\u00ab-f\u00b0-..<\/p>\n
time. and in terms of the  ‘issi1ed’~.._ V<\/p>\n
notice calling upon the petitionef  as  nfhy
\naction should not be    out of
\nbank guarantee,   to the petitioner.
\nThe AEPC. not   ‘t11e._’fexplana\ufb01on o\ufb01eived.<\/p>\n
tlorfeited 1a:s;3″j;7?,o5e;c;. \ufb01n-In ‘ef___the amounts in the bank<\/p>\n
\u00a7nai~antee,–j_   849-“1997 .A._!1_exLme-“B”. This
\nolder    befere the F-Jxet .A.ppeLe.1.r..–
\ncommittee, Vw\u00a7’e._li’eqn.\ufb01nned by order dated 31-1e–2e-oe<\/p>\n
A11. KI i,,,j’~t(_’,”V,’v–_   the Second Appellate Committee<\/p>\n
 the ‘1’\u00bbetitioneI’s appeal by order dated 30-12-2003<\/p>\n
 ‘  In the admitted  noticed supra; the “””t:ions<\/p>\n
 _  fo’r-clecision making are,<\/p>\n
at whether the challenge to me  in so far as it
\nrelates to forfeiture,_ for non-ful\ufb01llment of the export
\nobligation within the time stipulated, is<\/p>\n
sustainable?\n<\/p>\n
\n
pg:\n<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
\n
b) whether the :”‘u’f’-;PC\u00ab__a.”P:.{‘. Apmllate <\/p>\n
jueti\ufb01ed in_1ejecting the peuuonexis er <\/p>\n
majeure. while dismise\ufb01n’g’t11e  V’ <\/p>\n
9. inn’ fut unjr, \ufb02’1″, of the <\/p>\n
to the petitioner was at  _.oi’=the  ttho
\n\ufb01led an application’ to   garruents for the
\nbalance of the quge t  stipulated, and
\nvoluntari1_-g.     interalia.\n<\/p>\n
oovena.1nt:i1tg-.,    to ful\ufb01ll the export<\/p>\n
obliga\ufb01ong; “in   be subject to torfeiture<\/p>\n
_.1.Va.1_ee 4’_1″”Tl_1’e’ petitioner consciously agreed to<\/p>\n
the $12′-:r.e. of .t.’1:_”fe_rfei..:.*r; t1I.=.=.- if it e.tq_K_vrt1__:d garments<\/p>\n
 beyond   H 9L”r”:ri: _ of the export en’-:i”‘ment, after<\/p>\n
 –\u00bb _1Vevo;lide~.t:;its11_, it would be liable   forfeiture<\/p>\n
  75%, forfeiture would be in full, from out of<\/p>\n
 in the Bank guarantee, The consent of the<\/p>\n
 ‘A : 4_pe\ufb01t1’.oner to be subjected to the terms of the policy. relating<\/p>\n
  forfeiture in the event of failure to ful\ufb01ll the export<\/p>\n
entitlement. in the czimumtanee cannot be permitted to
\nappmh-at.. a__ _,probete nor assume inconsistent positions.<\/p>\n
36 ‘*’w ha’v’i’.1g been ‘.:1:e’.1_-‘~%..’=..at’-… 1\u00b0_r-. t1n._. .p1,:Ie-ate before the<\/p>\n
ML<\/p>\n
L) \\<\/p>\n
pa
\n(:3<\/p>\n
First and ‘Second \ufb01pwiiate nit.-gees, axe _z\u00a7.isen~;;tlea–g.;m<\/p>\n
questioning the validity of the forffeiture ciause: intiiea\u00e9g-c@cyo’. ” <\/p>\n
10: _h_..  —\n<\/p>\n
i1′–\ufb01.-;….1 and u’.:maso:=..-at.-ie:’L:’;:a:%\u00bbt..-.’ci,  beyontl
\n of considexatioial i it mliw of
\nallotting quotas is   foieifyi
\nexchange, is    the county anti as
\na   iuiider the quota allocated<\/p>\n
is  itiisl object of maximising<\/p>\n
 the policy provides a clause for .<\/p>\n
tbxfoituuje. _ The Government entitled to formulate a<\/p>\n
  on precise tithing and “manner of<\/p>\n
J…J..’…..\n<\/p>\n
\n
‘ 2 , i:’uf:1en1e12_ u n ‘*ft}1-a quota to achieve 9. mm –_ nr bjcctive,<\/p>\n
 in ‘me matters ‘ff ‘o”‘-‘tar-.131 tafa\u00e9e, in my<\/p>\n
opinion; being peculiar in its nature. the Governme”t W”<\/p>\n
 . ,   utelliiwithin its rights to pmvide for forfeiture and therefore,<\/p>\n
V’ ‘ — cannot be termed as either irrational or unconstitutional. It<\/p>\n
must be borne in mind that there must be free play with the
\nGovernment in matters of economic policies which are not
\nsubject to judicial review, unless demonstrated to be<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
\\<\/p>\n
14<\/span><\/p>\n
contrary to statutory provisions or the Oonetitut:’.on;.j’ fit’ is<\/p>\n
weh e.e..t!…. law that eoI.1_rt..s_:, in exercise <\/p>\n
are  equipped to adjutiieute  at-\u00bb:-erg;\n<\/p>\n
court, no–doubt has a    of
\na decision, no  ‘ie :4 Vtundamental
\nrights are not   to the extent
\nP\u00b011l1iss1’b}e ‘    . x V  ‘ <\/p>\n
____ H      citfzumstanoes. n iearneci Single
\nJutige__   of GOKALDAS IMAGES<\/p>\n
L1MI’:EDtt  INDIA in W.P.No.8539]2_003 and<\/p>\n
foonnectedf %writ. iretitiona, by order dated 12-03-2003,<\/p>\n
.  –. A  ~t\u00a7_l1e  that the policy prov1d1n’ ‘ g for forfeiture<\/p>\n
  ‘V   of penalty for non-ful\ufb01llment of the obligation<\/p>\n
A  unt}.er_ “the 9%.. qu..t.. ct.-1-I…..I|d be _.@enged_ byan exporter<\/p>\n
wi:o7-“” had th” B”-\ufb01t of_a policy. fo%wLng. the r..1eoi_eio__ _f<\/p>\n
t v __ the Apex Court in the ease of PTR  (Medias) Pvt. Ltxl.<\/p>\n
and Others. Va. Union of india and Othem -reporter’! in AFR –<\/p>\n
1996 SC 3461, in the matter of interlierenee by writ courts<\/p>\n
– \\ I
\nwith policy matters, by observing thus: ‘ <\/p>\n
[mm
\n(L?!<\/p>\n
“4. An  has no nested Iigh\ufb01a _\u00bb_ <\/p>\n
export or import licences in terms of ”\n<\/p>\n
force at the date of his    V<\/p>\n
obvious reasons. gruntinfgz   _
\nupon the policy prevailing oft  date 5*.’  * V
\nofthe finance or  \u00ab\ufb01e; V 3-\n<\/p>\n
way be in a As’;-e*.!.er   ;- overall
\npictune of mass the  pennit or refuse
\nto grant    goods.\n<\/p>\n
eE\u00e9.’oisiow1;:” wquze be taken from
\n  _;:e;):g’p’  5 whit}: the
\n is ira ii.:.’izeiierr  prrar’i’fi’o”i “i:ru’ess’,<\/p>\n
    st’.-‘\ufb02ed  the re.g,h.4-s-Lia! is nu1_la,\ufb01de<\/p>\n
 as is st: tins power in which event it is for<\/p>\n
   plead and prove to the
\nsii:’isjo>z:!ion”‘oj’A Court that the refusal was<\/p>\n
‘ 5  \ufb02wiate\u00e9i  above factors.\n<\/p>\n
 P.’ as–owd, *.’he.-r.-:;.*’:.-r.-2, !.u..= d..–a.r -ha..!  of .<\/p>\n
 depends upon the policy prevai\ufb01rtg as on<\/p>\n
 as date of the grant of the licence. The Court,<\/p>\n
therefore, would not bind the Government with a
\npolicy whidz was existing on the date of
\nappifanfion as per   A prior
\nciecision woe.-id no!  the C-Lrzternrzgent for all
\ntimes to come. When the Govemment are %
\nsatisfied that change in the policy was nsasssasy “%<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
I <\/p>\n
‘: -511:\u00bb-111:2 ll  \ufb02   ‘<\/p>\n
um bu .5…-…mu
\n:___. nolicy  lay  new poh’ql,l.-.  T
\nthere\ufb01me, would prefer tojd\ufb02au-. \ufb01ige    A
\nGovernment to evolve   in  1;:\n<\/p>\n
interest and to ad amp agitate.  <\/p>\n
Government is ie\ufb01 fi\u00e9e. aetenn ine hgznorstierh in<\/p>\n
-u. ‘ ~.\n<\/p>\n
Av-Anon\u00bb -.\n<\/p>\n
4′ n ..  *
\num I Gala  l’7JlV_i”-ii.’-IaI’g=U.”-WI -\u00bb_Gl”I I’3I”.uvu’..~.~.nru-v.:.-*s.ru.u5 G’?<\/p>\n
h:-‘zi._h\ufb01__- h.\u00ab:.;;hhuc interest. It<\/p>\n
or ?'”*d?3’i\u00a21 the  at   % W0″ policy in
\n1i)”u?’1::’_12.”‘”l\u00abQ.8(‘..}lab\ufb01’f’lf.\u00a5 evolved. . . .”<\/p>\n
1.-5;’   u ‘\ufb02uun U1 3. Lcanuuu uhu\ufb01 uu up G;<\/p>\n
the pfjDe_ih:h\u00a2%ih Goicaidas images Limimi supra,<\/p>\n
‘ ‘in   AI’ Inn.’-n-u.n.:-I ‘ ah. In livdnn {:<\/p>\n
2007(7)””SIfR .3e:7A(oEe)% took the View that garment export h<\/p>\n
   ‘its nature on account of quotas being<\/p>\n
V    country. the Government was well within<\/p>\n
  iiis   formulate a policy for full and maximum<\/p>\n
uh\ufb01shhhn of the quota which cannot be interfered with.<\/p>\n
AA ‘ “I:iAavVisng read the entire text of the judgment. I fmd no good<\/p>\n
\ufb01\ufb02\n<\/p>\n
-4<\/p>\n
13 “”*=- ela-Lee e1’e.:”.-lee-mm n+’\ufb01~zee-:.n_e.je!3i*e; evenciitie <\/p>\n
‘In Q9<\/p>\n
based on iaie Ieeeipt ‘f “”bx–i\u20acs ri”e in h”_”*5*  <\/p>\n
in_ Tamil Nadu. Aithough tho   i;’neV..<\/p>\n
petitioner contend that \ufb011%”~.___  not
\nconsider the 1’-aotum of poeogumme of fabric
\nfrom Chennai, the  tlxeitrevnsport strike
\nduring the third   not impressed by
\nthat subngieeipii.    -export entitlement<\/p>\n
was -4; upto 31-12-1996 to<\/p>\n
“‘r”.””‘fs’e   The mntentien t..L-_ there
\nwaeheavy   of  Nada ‘6″ “hieh the<\/p>\n
man um onuers ~o1″the\u00ab..\u00a3obxio were unable to cieiiver goods on<\/p>\n
 does a ‘i1et…..:31ean that the downpour was over a<\/p>\n
‘  ”   of several days and months. It was for<\/p>\n
i’ . h “the  to have made necessary arrangements in its<\/p>\n
 taking into consideration the yearly phenomena of<\/p>\n
AA  rains in coastal Tamil Nadu during the months of<\/p>\n
e.__..r n d December  ensure receipt of fabrics well<\/p>\n
I<\/p>\n
b”far-‘ th-= *-‘*or.%r. m wmply ‘.-.*it.. the exp-J,-rt ehligelie-ni<\/p>\n
1 . Accordirtg w the learned. comn..e1,_..’t3e1;tZ-ioI;er<\/p>\n
placed Ieiiance upon newspaper cut\ufb01\ufb01\ufb01s   “%{\u00a7}~du’  <\/p>\n
the relevant purchase indents    <\/p>\n
receipt of the fabrics was d.ue_    or
\nthe petitioner. An  of   of
\nCommittees diselonen.  toe material on
\nrecord. In fact. the  observed that
\nthe    2 of meteorological
\n on that the petitioner had
\n   ii’.lW%’.'””n+”” and Salem; In
\nodtiition, tit   what is piibii\ufb01ied to the<\/p>\n
 by “V-the-._il’Vieteo1ological Department  that<\/p>\n
 on 1o*h”Deeembe1′, eoitnbotote and Salem did hardly<\/p>\n
‘  .i’ains although some parts of Tamil Nadu like –<\/p>\n
  heavy rains. Thus. in the opinion of<\/p>\n
itiztet Appellate Committee. it did not constitute a force-<\/p>\n
* ‘ ~mnieI II: condition. The Second Appellate committee. in its<\/p>\n
order Annex-.:.**e.-“.13″ Am a._m_eed the  on record and<\/p>\n
B<\/p>\n
connrmeu  l].IlS;lii”l\ufb01” ‘ft1.|” }’t’irst A\ufb01peliate …cme\\.ittee. .-<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
KJ \\<\/p>\n
15. .he plea ..f .._:I._po1’I.2.ers.I’ !_1t_Iil\u00a7\u00a7 last<\/p>\n
week of {‘:ec:ember, 1996 m”st  <\/p>\n
admittedly. the manufacture of’ _ ‘*”d  V<\/p>\n
transported only during i’199’7.1 iotiilefg
\nthe manufactured goods     the
\nof December 1996\u00bb   it    <\/p>\n
16.   of  that the  in
\nmap? t .0-*5  morennc vvnen nu   e-nae’ tum ‘ into<\/p>\n
  1997 which aspect of the<\/p>\n
  bmught to the notice of the ‘First –<\/p>\n
  the Second  <\/p>\n
tires not   considemtion is without merit since the<\/p>\n
   ‘ teeonsiderat1orn’ .\n<\/p>\n
 A  tact \ufb01nding authorities having recorded a<\/p>\n
it  the material on record was not satisfactory proof<\/p>\n
it ‘ of eicistenoe of fame-majeure oondition so as to entitle the<\/p>\n
 ftie\ufb01\ufb01oher to the bene\ufb01t of waiver of the forfeiture. in my<\/p>\n
winter. %’i:=.e-t be …v;e-.=-zed. in exe1t_2i__ -1′-e;:t:ra–o;dinar_y writ<\/p>\n
This Court, exercising writ jurisdiction. is f\u00e9zfat  as’ .a<\/p>\n
court of appeal to re-appreciate  entire’  <\/p>\n
contention of the leamed ccuiigsele   <\/p>\n
necessarily fail.\n<\/p>\n
18. The last   extended by<\/p>\n
the authorities in identicaii  in pm-decided<\/p>\n
de15encisnt.iVj1ipo:ti:factsjaf eacii case. based on (iocum
\nevidence to estnbiish~ existence of such conditions. It is<\/p>\n
 :in’.’otiiefcnses the authority may have extended<\/p>\n
 txasextiio\ufb02relevant documents in support of the plea<\/p>\n
‘  kt es  The decision to extend the bene\ufb01t of the<\/p>\n
  being dependant upon the facts and<\/p>\n
hrnna urifhnt An I
\ne’ V-nun<\/p>\n
cizeuznstances and  record in a particular case, it<\/p>\n
ideniicai, have appiicaiion. M<\/p>\n
4.. .:.’…….’….;..-I” ‘ -.
\nin uxnuumwguu ~<\/p>\n
\u00abId<\/p>\n
KS<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court New Generation Apparels vs Union Of India on 12 March, 2008 Author: Ram Mohan Reddy 1…: THE norrnm MR. i , wan’ I-n’.gm__o1 5 ..; __ NEW GENERATION ARPARELS E ‘ 28-E, PEENYA;INDLiS’Tl?\u00a3}AL-H;.:*.._ 1 . AREA 11 P1iAs3E, ‘.BANGAL~.\u20ac)RE 53. REP . PETITIONER 1 E’r1ioN.OEIm)L\u00bb{ 5 ” REP’-m”ITs SECY _ }.d_INIS’PR\u00a5mQP-“TEXTILES A […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-255017","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nNew Generation Apparels vs Union Of India on 12 March, 2008 - 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\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"New Generation Apparels vs Union Of India on 12 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-03-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-05-10T06:14:59+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=\"17 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"New Generation Apparels vs Union Of India on 12 March, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-03-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-05-10T06:14:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008\"},\"wordCount\":2290,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008\",\"name\":\"New Generation Apparels vs Union Of India on 12 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-03-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-05-10T06:14:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"New Generation Apparels vs Union Of India on 12 March, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"New Generation Apparels vs Union Of India on 12 March, 2008 - 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\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"New Generation Apparels vs Union Of India on 12 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-03-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-05-10T06:14:59+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":"17 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"New Generation Apparels vs Union Of India on 12 March, 2008","datePublished":"2008-03-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-05-10T06:14:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008"},"wordCount":2290,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008","name":"New Generation Apparels vs Union Of India on 12 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-03-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-05-10T06:14:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/new-generation-apparels-vs-union-of-india-on-12-march-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"New Generation Apparels vs Union Of India on 12 March, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/255017","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=255017"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/255017\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=255017"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=255017"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=255017"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}