{"id":255336,"date":"2010-06-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-06-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010"},"modified":"2017-11-19T21:28:07","modified_gmt":"2017-11-19T15:58:07","slug":"sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010","title":{"rendered":"Sahadevan vs Authorised Officer on 16 June, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Sahadevan vs Authorised Officer on 16 June, 2010<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 20710 of 2009(G)\n\n\n1. SAHADEVAN,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. AUTHORISED OFFICER,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. P.J.STALIN,\n\n3. S.I.OF POLICE, ELOOR POLICE STATION.\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.GIKKU JACOB\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI, SC, HDFC\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON\n\n Dated :16\/06\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                   P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J\n                  ---------------------------\n                    W.P(C) No.20710 of 2009-G\n                 ----------------------------\n                Dated this the 16th day of June, 2010.\n\n                           J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">      The petitioner, who is a stranger to the loan transaction with<\/p>\n<p>the respondent Bank, has filed this Writ Petition seeking for a<\/p>\n<p>direction to allow the petitioner to remit the arrears of the loan on<\/p>\n<p>behalf of the second respondent\/borrower, if the same is not<\/p>\n<p>remitted by him within a reasonable time and to effect the future<\/p>\n<p>instalments on the respective due dates and for some incidental<\/p>\n<p>reliefs.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">      2.   The sequence of events as described by the learned<\/p>\n<p>counsel for the petitioner is that the property, which originally<\/p>\n<p>belonged to the petitioner, was sold to the second respondent for<\/p>\n<p>valuable sale consideration. It is stated that the second respondent<\/p>\n<p>had borrowed some amount from the respondent Bank for<\/p>\n<p>purchasing this property from the petitioner, creating security<\/p>\n<p>interest over the property in question. But the entire sale price<\/p>\n<p>payable to the petitioner is stated as not satisfied, under which<\/p>\n<p>circumstances, there is some arrangements between the petitioner<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">W.P(C) No.20710 of 2009-G           2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>and the second respondent\/borrower; based on which, the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner is continuing to occupy the premises.<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">       3.     While so, since the second respondent did not satisfy the<\/p>\n<p>liability to the first respondent Bank, the account was declared as<\/p>\n<p>&#8216;NPA&#8217; and the Bank proceeded with steps under the <a href=\"\/doc\/52229129\/\" id=\"a_1\">SARFAESI Act<\/a> to<\/p>\n<p>take physical possession of the premises and to have the same sold<\/p>\n<p>in public auction. It was in the said circumstances, the petitioner<\/p>\n<p>approached this Court by filing the above Writ Petition seeking for a<\/p>\n<p>direction to permit the petitioner to clear the liability on behalf of<\/p>\n<p>the second respondent and to have the loan account regularised.<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">       4.     The learned counsel for the Bank submits with reference<\/p>\n<p>to the contends of the counter affidavit that, the petitioner has filed<\/p>\n<p>the Writ Petition without revealing the true state of affairs and in a<\/p>\n<p>clandestine manner, colluding with the second respondent. After<\/p>\n<p>considering the matter on admission, this Court ordered notice on<\/p>\n<p>23.7.2009 and since there was no interim order of stay, the Bank<\/p>\n<p>proceeded with further steps by filing a petition under <a href=\"\/doc\/57488768\/\" id=\"a_1\">Section 14<\/a> of<\/p>\n<p>the SARFAESI Act before the Chief Judicial Magistrate&#8217;s Court,<\/p>\n<p>Ernakulam, for rendering necessary assistance to take physical<\/p>\n<p>possession of the building. The property along with the building<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">W.P(C) No.20710 of 2009-G          3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>was taken possession of and handed over to the respondent Bank<\/p>\n<p>and the Advocate Commissioner filed a report before the Chief<\/p>\n<p>Judicial Magistrate&#8217;s Court, complying with the direction, as borne<\/p>\n<p>by Ext.R1(d).\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">       5.     The case of the respondent Bank is that, subsequent to<\/p>\n<p>taking over the possession as above and inspite of placing a security<\/p>\n<p>guard at the premises, the petitioner herein took the law into his<\/p>\n<p>hands; threatened and drove away the security guard; forcefully<\/p>\n<p>took over the possession of the building and started living there,<\/p>\n<p>which made the Bank to file complaints before the Police, as borne<\/p>\n<p>by Exts.R1(e) and (f). The Bank also filed a petition before the Chief<\/p>\n<p>Judicial Magistrate&#8217;s Court pointing out the sequence of events,<\/p>\n<p>which is stated as already heard and reserved for orders.<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">       6.     The learned counsel for the Bank submits that the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner does not have any `locus standi&#8217; to file this Writ Petition,<\/p>\n<p>more so, in view of the fact that the property was sold by the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner himself to the second respondent and the sale<\/p>\n<p>consideration, to an extent of Rs.21 lakhs was provided by the Bank<\/p>\n<p>by way of crossed cheque, in the name of the petitioner by way of<\/p>\n<p>the loan facility extended to the second respondent\/borrower, on<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_2\">W.P(C) No.20710 of 2009-G          4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>the strength of the security interest created over the property by the<\/p>\n<p>purchaser ie. the second respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">       7.     The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the<\/p>\n<p>proceedings finalised by the Bank were behind the petitioner and<\/p>\n<p>that the rights and interests of the petitioner, over the rights of the<\/p>\n<p>second respondent, are not liable to be adversely affected in any<\/p>\n<p>manner. This Court finds it difficult to accept the version of the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner.     The sale effected by the petitioner in favour of the<\/p>\n<p>second respondent is complete. The second respondent\/borrower<\/p>\n<p>created security interest over the property in question in connection<\/p>\n<p>with the loan availed from the Bank.            The amount of sale<\/p>\n<p>consideration disbursed by the Bank was directly to the petitioner by<\/p>\n<p>way of crossed cheque, as agreed among the parties. The cause of<\/p>\n<p>action sought to be agitated on the basis of the alleged rights<\/p>\n<p>between the petitioner and the second respondent, can&#8217;t thwart the<\/p>\n<p>rights and liberties of the Bank under the <a href=\"\/doc\/52229129\/\" id=\"a_2\">SARFAESI Act<\/a>. In other<\/p>\n<p>words, the cause of action for the petitioner, if any, in respect of the<\/p>\n<p>alleged non-payment of the sale consideration by the second<\/p>\n<p>respondent, is entirely different from the cause of action being<\/p>\n<p>pursued by the Bank in connection with the loan extended to the<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_3\">W.P(C) No.20710 of 2009-G            5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>second respondent.        This Court finds that the Bank is perfectly<\/p>\n<p>justified in proceeding against the second respondent\/borrower,<\/p>\n<p>who has not chosen to challenge the same in any manner. This<\/p>\n<p>being the position, the Bank is at liberty to proceed with further<\/p>\n<p>steps for getting the physical possession of the property concerned<\/p>\n<p>and to have the same sold in the public auction, in accordance with<\/p>\n<p>law. The rights and liberties of the petitioner if any, as against the<\/p>\n<p>second respondent, are left open. Relief&#8217;s sought for in the Writ<\/p>\n<p>Petition are not correct or sustainable. Interference is declined and<\/p>\n<p>the Writ Petition is dismissed accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">\n<p id=\"p_8\">                                         Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_9\">                                 P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON<br \/>\n                                         JUDGE<\/p>\n<p>                          \/\/True Copy\/\/<\/p>\n<p>                                         P.A to Judge<br \/>\nab<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Sahadevan vs Authorised Officer on 16 June, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 20710 of 2009(G) 1. SAHADEVAN, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. AUTHORISED OFFICER, &#8230; Respondent 2. P.J.STALIN, 3. S.I.OF POLICE, ELOOR POLICE STATION. For Petitioner :SRI.GIKKU JACOB For Respondent :SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI, SC, HDFC The Hon&#8217;ble MR. Justice [&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-255336","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>Sahadevan vs Authorised Officer on 16 June, 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\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sahadevan vs Authorised Officer on 16 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-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=\"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-11-19T15:58:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"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\\\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sahadevan vs Authorised Officer on 16 June, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-19T15:58:07+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010\"},\"wordCount\":954,\"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\\\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010\",\"name\":\"Sahadevan vs Authorised Officer on 16 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-19T15:58:07+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sahadevan vs Authorised Officer on 16 June, 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":"Sahadevan vs Authorised Officer on 16 June, 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\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sahadevan vs Authorised Officer on 16 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-11-19T15:58:07+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sahadevan vs Authorised Officer on 16 June, 2010","datePublished":"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-19T15:58:07+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010"},"wordCount":954,"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\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010","name":"Sahadevan vs Authorised Officer on 16 June, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-06-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-19T15:58:07+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sahadevan-vs-authorised-officer-on-16-june-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sahadevan vs Authorised Officer on 16 June, 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\/255336","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=255336"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/255336\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=255336"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=255336"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=255336"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}