{"id":25559,"date":"2010-05-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-05-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010"},"modified":"2017-12-24T01:06:00","modified_gmt":"2017-12-23T19:36:00","slug":"jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010","title":{"rendered":"Jacob Mathew M. vs The Assistant Secretary on 21 May, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Jacob Mathew M. vs The Assistant Secretary on 21 May, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 16848 of 2003(E)\n\n\n1. JACOB MATHEW M., SAKUDA MALLIK &\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY, ELECTRICITY\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE THRISSUR CORPORATION, REPRESENTED\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.K.MURALEEDHARAN\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.K.B.MOHANDAS,SC,THRISSUR CORPORATIO\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON\n\n Dated :21\/05\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                    P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.\n              ..............................................................................\n                        W.P.(C) No. 16848 OF 2003\n               .........................................................................\n                         Dated this the 21st May , 2010\n\n\n\n                                    J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
      The petitioner, who is a consumer of electricity being<\/p>\n
distributed by the respondents as a licensee in the                                           area in<\/p>\n
Thrissur,   has come up before this Court with the following<\/p>\n
prayers:\n<\/p>\n
           “i) Call for the records and;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other<\/p>\n
           appropriate                writ or direction, directing the<\/p>\n
           respondents                   to         reconnect the electricity<\/p>\n
           connection to the petitioner’s shop No.25\/699<\/p>\n
           with consumer No. 7445-C forthwith and ;<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
           iii) issue           a writ of mandamus                            or any other<\/p>\n
           appropriate writ , order or direction, directing<\/p>\n
           the respondents to furnish the index meter<\/p>\n
           reading of consumer No.7445-C for the period<\/p>\n
           from 4\/91 to 1\/2001 and further direction to<\/p>\n
           keep in abeyance all other coercive steps.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      2. The case projected in the Writ Petition is that there is<\/p>\n
absolutely no rhyme or reason for having issued Ext.P1 bill dated<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No. 16848 OF 2003<\/p>\n
                                2<\/span><\/p>\n
16.09.2002 demanding to satisfy a huge amount           stated as<\/p>\n
arrears of energy charges till March, 2001, lest coercive steps<\/p>\n
should be taken against the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
     3. The sequence of events as described in the Writ Petition<\/p>\n
shows that    on receipt of Ext. P1, the petitioner, who is<\/p>\n
conducting a shop dealing with     selling  Greeting Cards, sent<\/p>\n
Ext.P2 representation seeking for details\/clarification to sustain<\/p>\n
Ext.P1.   Because of coercive steps, the petitioner was also<\/p>\n
constrained to approach this Court       along with    a similarly<\/p>\n
situated person by filing   O.P.   29165 of 2002,      which was<\/p>\n
disposed of   as per Ext.P3 judgment passed on 08.10.2002<\/p>\n
directing  the respondents      to consider the representations<\/p>\n
preferred by the petitioners in accordance with law and to pass<\/p>\n
appropriate orders, simultaneously intercepting the       coercive<\/p>\n
proceedings   till such time .   Pursuant to Ext. P3 judgment,<\/p>\n
Ext.P4 statement was supplied to the petitioner       showing the<\/p>\n
amounts due from the petitioner for different periods from April<\/p>\n
1991 to March 2001, however without giving the index of the<\/p>\n
meter reading and also the corresponding rates of energy<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No. 16848 OF 2003<\/p>\n
                                   3<\/span><\/p>\n
charges payable at the relevant time. This made the petitioner<\/p>\n
to file a further representation as borne by Ext.P5 referring to<\/p>\n
the actual facts and figures . In the meanwhile, the power was<\/p>\n
disconnected, which hence was sought to be remedied by filing<\/p>\n
this Writ Petition. It is stated from the part of the petitioner that<\/p>\n
pursuant to the interim order, the power was restored and that<\/p>\n
the petitioner is enjoying the same.\n<\/p>\n
      4. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit seeking<\/p>\n
to sustain the figures and action pursued by them. It is stated<\/p>\n
in the counter affidavit     that an arrear bill had already been<\/p>\n
issued to the petitioner, which however was not honoured by<\/p>\n
him and it was in the said circumstance,            that the entire<\/p>\n
outstanding liability was sought to be cleared by issuing Ext.P1.<\/p>\n
But for the averments in the said counter affidavit, no materials<\/p>\n
have been produced before this Court           to substantiate the<\/p>\n
contentions. It also remains to be a fact that the connection was<\/p>\n
never dismantled at any point of time, though it was cut off,<\/p>\n
which was subsequently restored pursuant to the interim order.<\/p>\n
      5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks to place<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No. 16848 OF 2003<\/p>\n
                                  4<\/span><\/p>\n
reliance on Ext.P6 bill issued after the         ‘spot billing’ was<\/p>\n
introduced, to show that the consumption of the petitioner was<\/p>\n
quite consistent and this being the position,      the figures given<\/p>\n
by the respondents in Ext.P4 (particularly as given tabulated at<\/p>\n
page 3 of Ext.P4 in respect of the period from September 1997<\/p>\n
till  January 2001 showing much variation as to the consumed<\/p>\n
units and the amount payable) are not correct or sustainable.<\/p>\n
More so, when the nature of business being pursued by the<\/p>\n
petitioner is not a power oriented business, but a shop      dealing<\/p>\n
with selling Greeting Cards, which submission is sought to be<\/p>\n
substantiated with reference to the consistent level of energy<\/p>\n
consumption and extent of        liability as revealed from Ext.P6<\/p>\n
series bills issued after the introduction of ‘spot billing’<\/p>\n
      6. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the<\/p>\n
first petitioner to Ext. P3 judgment who had filed O.P.No. 29165<\/p>\n
of 2002 along with the petitioner, on receipt of similar bills and<\/p>\n
on being confronted with similar situation, had approached this<\/p>\n
Court by filing O.P. 7214 of 2003,         wherein interference was<\/p>\n
declined by the learned single Judge relegating the petitioner to<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No. 16848 OF 2003<\/p>\n
                                   5<\/span><\/p>\n
avail the alternate remedy, which was subjected to challenge<\/p>\n
by filing W.A.No. 1384 of 2009. During the pendency of the said<\/p>\n
Writ Appeal, the parties were directed to be present before the<\/p>\n
Court and the records were also perused . After perusal of the<\/p>\n
records and hearing the parties concerned, the Division Bench of<\/p>\n
this Court passed the final verdict on 16.07.2009, whereby, to<\/p>\n
put a quietus to the matter, particularly when the records were<\/p>\n
very old and the correctness and sustainability of figures were<\/p>\n
disputed much, a workable solution         was     carved out and<\/p>\n
appropriate directions were given as given in paragraph No.3 of<\/p>\n
the judgment. This Court finds that a similar course has to be<\/p>\n
pursued in the connected case of this petitioner as well.<\/p>\n
      7. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to re-consider<\/p>\n
the matter     in the light of    the judgment     rendered by the<\/p>\n
Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No. 1384 of 2009 and re-fix<\/p>\n
the liability of the petitioner . However, since it is shown by the<\/p>\n
respondents in Ext. P4 that the variation in consumption is<\/p>\n
mainly for the period from 9\/1997, the period to be reckoned, in<\/p>\n
the light of observations of the Division Bench, is for the period<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No. 16848 OF 2003<\/p>\n
                                  6<\/span><\/p>\n
from 9\/1997 till 3\/2001. The matter shall be considered and<\/p>\n
finalised as above, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the<\/p>\n
petitioner   and the outcome shall be communicated to the<\/p>\n
petitioner by Registered Post as expeditiously as possible, at any<\/p>\n
rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this<\/p>\n
judgment; which shall be satisfied by the petitioner within two<\/p>\n
weeks    thereafter.       Subject   to   this, further  recovery<\/p>\n
proceedings\/coercive steps, stated as being pursued against the<\/p>\n
petitioner shall be kept in abeyance for the time being.<\/p>\n
      The Writ Petition is disposed of .\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                 P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON,
\n                                           JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
\nlk<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No. 16848 OF 2003<\/p>\n
                         7<\/span><\/p>\n
                          P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.\n<\/p>\n
                          ……………………………………………<\/p>\n
                             W.P.(C) No. 16848 OF 2003<\/p>\n
                          ……………………………………………
\n                             Dated this the 21st May, 2010<\/p>\n
                                     J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Jacob Mathew M. vs The Assistant Secretary on 21 May, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 16848 of 2003(E) 1. JACOB MATHEW M., SAKUDA MALLIK & … Petitioner Vs 1. THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY, ELECTRICITY … Respondent 2. THE THRISSUR CORPORATION, REPRESENTED For Petitioner :SRI.R.K.MURALEEDHARAN For Respondent :SRI.K.B.MOHANDAS,SC,THRISSUR CORPORATIO […]<\/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-25559","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nJacob Mathew M. vs The Assistant Secretary on 21 May, 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\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Jacob Mathew M. vs The Assistant Secretary on 21 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-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=\"2010-05-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-23T19:36:00+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\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Jacob Mathew M. vs The Assistant Secretary on 21 May, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-05-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-23T19:36:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1069,\"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\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010\",\"name\":\"Jacob Mathew M. vs The Assistant Secretary on 21 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-05-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-23T19:36:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jacob Mathew M. vs The Assistant Secretary on 21 May, 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:\/\/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":"Jacob Mathew M. vs The Assistant Secretary on 21 May, 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\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Jacob Mathew M. vs The Assistant Secretary on 21 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-05-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-23T19:36:00+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\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Jacob Mathew M. vs The Assistant Secretary on 21 May, 2010","datePublished":"2010-05-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-23T19:36:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010"},"wordCount":1069,"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\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010","name":"Jacob Mathew M. vs The Assistant Secretary on 21 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-05-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-23T19:36:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jacob-mathew-m-vs-the-assistant-secretary-on-21-may-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jacob Mathew M. vs The Assistant Secretary on 21 May, 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:\/\/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\/25559","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=25559"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25559\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25559"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25559"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25559"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}