{"id":259177,"date":"2009-04-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-04-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009"},"modified":"2016-09-18T05:25:40","modified_gmt":"2016-09-17T23:55:40","slug":"raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009","title":{"rendered":"Raghavan vs Reji Abraham on 2 April, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Raghavan vs Reji Abraham on 2 April, 2009<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nMACA.No. 706 of 2009()\n\n\n1. RAGHAVAN, AGED 57, S\/O.\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. SANTHAMMA W\/O.RAGHAVAN, AGED 51, DO-DO-\n3. MAYA, D\/O.RAGHAVAN, AGED 31,DO-DO-\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. REJI ABRAHAM, SASTHAMKOVIL HOUSE,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. TIBY JOSEPH, CHERIVUPARAMBIL HOUSE,\n\n3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.K.RADHAKRISHNAN\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR\n\n Dated :02\/04\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                R.BASANT &amp; C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ.\n                      ------------------------------------\n                     M.A.C.A No.706 of 2009\n                      -------------------------------------\n               Dated this the 2nd day of April, 2009\n\n                               JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">BASANT, J.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">     The claimants before the Tribunal are the appellants before<\/p>\n<p>us. They are the father and mother aged 54 years and 48 years<\/p>\n<p>and the married sister of a deceased person who was aged 26<\/p>\n<p>years at the time of his death. He suffered injuries in a motor<\/p>\n<p>accident on 07.09.2005 and succumbed to those injuries later on<\/p>\n<p>the same day. He was allegedly employed as a rubber tapper. It<\/p>\n<p>was claimed that he was getting a monthly income of Rs.4,000\/-.<\/p>\n<p>An amount of Rs.8 lakhs was claimed as compensation. Before<\/p>\n<p>the Tribunal, no oral evidence was adduced. Exts.A1 to A6 were<\/p>\n<p>marked. Ext.A5 is the salary certificate of the deceased which<\/p>\n<p>shows that the deceased was employed by a private individual<\/p>\n<p>who had issued that certificate and he was getting an amount of<\/p>\n<p>Rs.3,300\/- by way of monthly salary and Rs.50\/- as allowance per<\/p>\n<p>day in addition to festival allowances.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">     2.    The Tribunal on an anxious consideration of all the<\/p>\n<p>relevant inputs proceeded to pass the impugned award directing<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">M.A.C.A No.706 of 2009         2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>payment of a total amount of Rs.2.61 lakhs along with interest @<\/p>\n<p>7% per annum from the date of petition to the date of payment.<\/p>\n<p>The break up of the said award is given below.\n<\/p>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">     i)   Pain and suffering   :     Rs. 10,000\/-\n\n     ii)  Expenses for\n          transportation       :     Rs. 1,000\/-\n\n     iii) Damage to clothing\n          and articles         :     Rs. 1,000\/-\n\n     iv)  Loss of love and\n          affection            :     Rs. 10,000\/-\n\n     v)   Funeral expenses     :     Rs. 5,000\/-\n\n     vi)  Compensation for\n          loss of dependency\n          (3,000 X = X 12 X 13):     Rs.2,34,000\/-\n                                     ...................\n                     Total     :     Rs.2,61,000\/-\n                                     ...................\n\n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_3\">     3.   The appellants claimed to be aggrieved by the<\/p>\n<p>impugned award.     Called upon to explain the nature of the<\/p>\n<p>challenge which the appellants want to mount against the<\/p>\n<p>impugned award, the learned counsel for the appellants<\/p>\n<p>challenges the correctness of the quantum of compensation<\/p>\n<p>awarded under the head of loss of dependency. The Tribunal<\/p>\n<p>had reckoned Rs.3,000\/- as the monthly income.             This is<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">M.A.C.A No.706 of 2009          3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>incorrect. Rs.4,000\/- must have been reckoned as the monthly<\/p>\n<p>income, contends the counsel. Ext.A5 salary certificate is relied<\/p>\n<p>on. The author of that certificate has not been examined. Even<\/p>\n<p>going by that certificate, Rs.3,300\/- is the monthly salary. In<\/p>\n<p>these circumstances we are of the opinion that the Tribunal<\/p>\n<p>committed no error warranting appellate interference in<\/p>\n<p>accepting only Rs.3,000\/- as the monthly income.<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">     4.   It is then contended that only 13 has been accepted as<\/p>\n<p>the multiplier. Going by the age of the deceased, 18 must have<\/p>\n<p>been taken as the multiplier. Going by the age of the father 11<\/p>\n<p>alone need be taken as the multiplier going by the second<\/p>\n<p>schedule of the <a href=\"\/doc\/785258\/\" id=\"a_1\">Motor Vehicles Act<\/a>. Going by the age of the<\/p>\n<p>mother the Tribunal had accepted the multiplier at 13. It is<\/p>\n<p>contended that multiplier applicable to the deceased must have<\/p>\n<p>been accepted. We find no merit in this contention. The claim is<\/p>\n<p>under <a href=\"\/doc\/136948773\/\" id=\"a_1\">Section 166<\/a> of the Motor Vehicles Act. The multiplier to<\/p>\n<p>be adopted is that of the older of the 2 persons &#8211; deceased and<\/p>\n<p>claimant. The Tribunal according to us committed no error in<\/p>\n<p>accepting the multiplier applicable to the mother, the elder<\/p>\n<p>person and who is younger in age than the other claimant, ie.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_2\">M.A.C.A No.706 of 2009           4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>father aged 54 years. The adoption of the multiplier at 13 does<\/p>\n<p>not, in these circumstances, call for any appellate interference.<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">      5.   The learned counsel for the appellants submits that<\/p>\n<p>the Tribunal deducted half of the monthly income as expenses of<\/p>\n<p>the deceased and has reckoned only a balance amount as<\/p>\n<p>contribution to the claimants. We are of the opinion that the<\/p>\n<p>Tribunal has committed no error in taking that approach. It may<\/p>\n<p>be idle to assume that 2\/3 of the amount would have been<\/p>\n<p>received by the parents as contribution from a young unmarried<\/p>\n<p>person like the deceased. In this case we further note that the<\/p>\n<p>Tribunal had not taken into reckoning the imminent possibility of<\/p>\n<p>marriage of the deceased who was aged 26 years and the<\/p>\n<p>possibility of depletion of contribution to the parents thereafter.<\/p>\n<p>It would only be reasonable to approach the question from that<\/p>\n<p>angle. The Tribunal appears to have taken half of the present<\/p>\n<p>earning as the average contribution for all the remaining years<\/p>\n<p>of dependency. Any alleged inadequacy in reckoning only 50%<\/p>\n<p>as the contribution is nullified and neutralised by the fact that<\/p>\n<p>for the entire remaining period of the multiplier (13 minus 2) the<\/p>\n<p>same amount has been accepted as contribution by the Tribunal.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_3\">M.A.C.A No.706 of 2009          5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>In any view of the matter, we are unable to agree that the<\/p>\n<p>impugned award warrants interference on this ground. No other<\/p>\n<p>ground of challenge is raised.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">     6.   This appeal is, in these circumstances, dismissed.<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">                                       (R.BASANT, JUDGE)<\/p>\n<p>                                     (C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)<\/p>\n<p>rtr\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Raghavan vs Reji Abraham on 2 April, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM MACA.No. 706 of 2009() 1. RAGHAVAN, AGED 57, S\/O. &#8230; Petitioner 2. SANTHAMMA W\/O.RAGHAVAN, AGED 51, DO-DO- 3. MAYA, D\/O.RAGHAVAN, AGED 31,DO-DO- Vs 1. REJI ABRAHAM, SASTHAMKOVIL HOUSE, &#8230; Respondent 2. TIBY JOSEPH, CHERIVUPARAMBIL HOUSE, 3. [&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-259177","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>Raghavan vs Reji Abraham on 2 April, 2009 - 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\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Raghavan vs Reji Abraham on 2 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-09-17T23:55:40+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=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Raghavan vs Reji Abraham on 2 April, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-17T23:55:40+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009\"},\"wordCount\":759,\"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\\\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009\",\"name\":\"Raghavan vs Reji Abraham on 2 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-17T23:55:40+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Raghavan vs Reji Abraham on 2 April, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Raghavan vs Reji Abraham on 2 April, 2009 - 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\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Raghavan vs Reji Abraham on 2 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-09-17T23:55:40+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Raghavan vs Reji Abraham on 2 April, 2009","datePublished":"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-17T23:55:40+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009"},"wordCount":759,"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\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009","name":"Raghavan vs Reji Abraham on 2 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-17T23:55:40+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/raghavan-vs-reji-abraham-on-2-april-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Raghavan vs Reji Abraham on 2 April, 2009"}]},{"@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\/259177","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=259177"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/259177\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=259177"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=259177"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=259177"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}