{"id":256681,"date":"2010-12-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-11-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010"},"modified":"2016-06-21T17:48:14","modified_gmt":"2016-06-21T12:18:14","slug":"emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010","title":{"rendered":"Emvee vs South on 1 December, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Emvee vs South on 1 December, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Akil Kureshi,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/7856\/2004\t 6\/ 6\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 7856 of 2004\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nEMVEE\nSYNTHETICS - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSOUTH\nGUJARAT VIJ.CO.LTD. &amp; 1 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMRS\nMAUNA M BHATT for\nPetitioner(s) : 1, \nMR SN SINHA for Respondent(s) : 1, \nRULE NOT\nRECD BACK for Respondent(s) :\n2, \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 01\/12\/2010 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">\t\tThe<br \/>\npetitioner has challenged the supplementary bill issued by the<br \/>\nrespondent-electricity company for an amount of Rs.11,22,318\/- on the<br \/>\npremise that there was tampering with the meter by the petitioner and<br \/>\ntheft of electricity. On 31.1.2004, high tension electricity<br \/>\nconnection supplied to the petitioner was checked by the officers of<br \/>\nthe respondent-Electricity Company. The meter was disconnected,<br \/>\nsealed and sent for laboratory testing. Laboratory report indicated<br \/>\nsome irregularities. Copy of the report is produced at Annexure `IV&#8217;<br \/>\nwith the petition. Electricity Company issued the bill of<br \/>\nRs.11,22,318\/- applying standard formula in case of theft of<br \/>\nelectricity. Petitioner challenged the bill before the Appellate<br \/>\nCommittee. Appellate Committee, however, by impugned order dated<br \/>\n3.5.2004, dismissed the appeal and upheld the demand of the Company.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">\t\tPreviously<br \/>\nwhen the matter was heard by my learned predecessor on 17.10.2005,<br \/>\nfollowing order was passed :\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">&#8220;1.\tThe<br \/>\nmatter is substantially heard. Following points emerge as a result of<br \/>\nhearing;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">2.\tThe<br \/>\nfindings of the Appellate Authority regarding the laboratory<br \/>\ninspection report clearly support the irregularities found at the<br \/>\ntime of checking and the same is contrary to the evidence on record.<br \/>\nApart from that on the meter being changed, the consumption of the<br \/>\npetitioner had remained the same which was recorded prior to the date<br \/>\nof inspection.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">3.\tHowever,<br \/>\nsince Mr.S.N.Sinha requests for time to produce additional evidence<br \/>\non record, as a last chance, S.O. to 25.10.2005.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">\t\tLearned<br \/>\ncounsel for the Electricity Company candidly stated that there is no<br \/>\nadditional evidence available. I have, therefore, heard learned<br \/>\nadvocates for the parties on the basis of material on record.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">\t\tLearned<br \/>\ncounsel Ms.Mauna Bhatt for the petitioner relied heavily on the<br \/>\nreport of the laboratory to contend that the main seals were found<br \/>\nintact. The report suggested that there was no tampering of the<br \/>\nmeter.  Conclusion of theft of electricity, therefore, was<br \/>\nimpermissible. She also relied on the report of the consumer dated<br \/>\n3.4.2004 in which he had given figures of consumption month-wise<br \/>\nimmediately before and after the date of checking. On such basis, she<br \/>\ncontended that there was no unusual increase in demand of the<br \/>\nelectricity energy after installation of new meter also.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">\t\tOn<br \/>\nthe other hand, learned counsel Mr.Sinha for the Electricity Company<br \/>\nopposed the petition contending that the authority of the Electricity<br \/>\nCompany as well as the Appellate Committee have examined all factual<br \/>\naspects and found that there was theft of electricity. No<br \/>\ninterference is, therefore, called for. He submitted that once<br \/>\nquestion of theft is established, the charges to be levied on the<br \/>\nconsumer depend on the formula and are not discretionary.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">\t\tHaving<br \/>\nthus heard the learned advocates for the parties and having perused<br \/>\nthe documents on record, I find that the laboratory report clearly<br \/>\nsuggested that the seal on the meter was intact. There was no<br \/>\ntampering on the company&#8217;s seal. Both the seals were found<br \/>\nuntampered. Upon checking of the meter also, no drop in consumption<br \/>\nwas recorded. In the concluding portion of the report, however, it<br \/>\nwas recorded that the consumer had tampered with the plastic seal on<br \/>\nthe meter box. The paper seal was also found torn. The report<br \/>\nunequivocally stated that there is no other irregularity found to<br \/>\nhave been committed. These findings, if viewed along with the<br \/>\nconsumption pattern of the consumer just before and after<br \/>\ninstallation of the new meter, would establish that there was no case<br \/>\nof theft of electricity. When the laboratory report itself suggested<br \/>\nthat the inner seals were intact, that there was no tampering on both<br \/>\nthe seals on the meter applied by the company and when the report<br \/>\nclearly stated that no other irregularity was noticed, in my opinion,<br \/>\nthe electricity company erred in jumping to the conclusion that the<br \/>\npetitioner had committed theft of electricity by tampering with the<br \/>\nmeter. To repeat, the report of the laboratory appreciated in light<br \/>\nof the consumer pattern would convince me that there was no case of<br \/>\ntheft of electricity. As noted, the petitioner has given the details<br \/>\nof such consumption for the period during June, 2003 to April, 2004<br \/>\nin his representation to the respondents. Such figures read as<br \/>\nfollows :\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_9\">R.No.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_10\">Month<\/p>\n<p>Date<br \/>\n\t\t\tof noting the reading<\/p>\n<p>Total<br \/>\n\t\t\tunits used<\/p>\n<p>Production<br \/>\n\t\t\tmeter <\/p>\n<p id=\"p_11\">1.<\/p>\n<p>June-03<\/p>\n<p>20.6.2003<\/p>\n<p>28696<\/p>\n<p>99649-50<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_12\">2.<\/p>\n<p>July-03<\/p>\n<p>20.7.03<\/p>\n<p>26090<\/p>\n<p>1,13,974-00<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_13\">3.<\/p>\n<p>Aug.-03<\/p>\n<p>19.8.03<\/p>\n<p>26345<\/p>\n<p>1,09,241-00<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_14\">4.<\/p>\n<p>Sept.-03<\/p>\n<p>20-9-03<\/p>\n<p>29603<\/p>\n<p>1,04,219-50<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_15\">5.<\/p>\n<p>Oct.-03<\/p>\n<p>19-10-03<\/p>\n<p>25269<\/p>\n<p>1,04,394-75<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_16\">6.<\/p>\n<p>Nov.-03<\/p>\n<p>19-11-03<\/p>\n<p>25580<\/p>\n<p>92662-00<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_17\">7.<\/p>\n<p>Dec.03<\/p>\n<p>20-12-03<\/p>\n<p>29248<\/p>\n<p>94242-00<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_18\">8.<\/p>\n<p>Jan.04<\/p>\n<p>19-1-04<\/p>\n<p>26835<\/p>\n<p>90956-00<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_19\">9.<\/p>\n<p>Feb.04<\/p>\n<p>17-2-2004<\/p>\n<p>11825<br \/>\n\t\t\told meter<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">\t\t\t9691<\/span><br \/>\n\t\t\tnew meter<\/p>\n<p>21516<\/p>\n<p>86707-00<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_20\">10.<\/p>\n<p>March.04<\/p>\n<p>20-3-2004<\/p>\n<p>27398<\/p>\n<p>90959-50<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_21\">11.<\/p>\n<p>April.04<\/p>\n<p>17-4-2004<\/p>\n<p>24191<\/p>\n<p>85600-00<\/p>\n<p>\t\tThe<br \/>\nabove figures are not disputed by the respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_22\">\t\tThe<br \/>\nAppellate Committee also proceeded more or less on the assumption<br \/>\nthat there was theft of electricity. In my opinion, it did not<br \/>\nappreciate the report of the laboratory and other evidence on record.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_23\">\t\tIn<br \/>\nthe result, the Appellate Order dated 3.5.2004 as well as the demand<br \/>\nunder the provisional bill are quashed. The amount already deposited<br \/>\nwith the petitioner at the time of filing appeal shall be given<br \/>\ncredit for in the future bills. Rule is made absolute with no order<br \/>\nas to costs.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_24\">\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(<br \/>\nAkil Kureshi, J )<\/p>\n<p>srilatha<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Emvee vs South on 1 December, 2010 Author: Akil Kureshi,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/7856\/2004 6\/ 6 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 7856 of 2004 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may [&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":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-256681","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Emvee vs South on 1 December, 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\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Emvee vs South on 1 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-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=\"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-21T12:18:14+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\\\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Emvee vs South on 1 December, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-21T12:18:14+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010\"},\"wordCount\":859,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010\",\"name\":\"Emvee vs South on 1 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-21T12:18:14+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Emvee vs South on 1 December, 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":"Emvee vs South on 1 December, 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\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Emvee vs South on 1 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-21T12:18:14+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\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Emvee vs South on 1 December, 2010","datePublished":"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-21T12:18:14+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010"},"wordCount":859,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010","name":"Emvee vs South on 1 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-21T12:18:14+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/emvee-vs-south-on-1-december-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Emvee vs South on 1 December, 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\/256681","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=256681"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/256681\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=256681"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=256681"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=256681"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}