{"id":259514,"date":"1977-01-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1977-01-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977"},"modified":"2019-01-30T08:18:58","modified_gmt":"2019-01-30T02:48:58","slug":"sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977","title":{"rendered":"Sudhangsu Kumar Mukherjee And &#8230; vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 21 January, 1977"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Calcutta High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Sudhangsu Kumar Mukherjee And &#8230; vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 21 January, 1977<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: AIR 1978 Cal 130<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A Banerjee<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: A K Janah, A N Banerjee<\/div>\n<p id=\"p_1\">JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p> A.N. Banerjee,  J.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\"> 1.   This   appeal is directed  against the award   made   by the  Arbitrator  on  a  reference  made   to him for   determination   of   compensation for demolished   building   and    structures on C. S. Plots Nos. 643 and 719 of Mauja Plata, P. S. Noappara, Dist. 24 Parganas. It appears that  disputed properties were requisitioned   by   the   State   Government for   public   purpose,    being    purpose    of Union of India under Rule 75-A of the Defence of India Rules.    The said requisition was subject to the provisions of the Requisitioning    and   Acquisition    of   Immovable Property Ordinance 1952, subsequently repealed and replaced by the Requisitioning   and   Acquisition    of  Immovable Property Act,   1952   (Act   XXX   of 1952). The requisition was made on 23-1-1943 and possession   was   taken   on   the same day.    Monthly rent of Rs. 75\/- was being paid to the claimants   up to 15-4-1957. On 25-5-1957, an amount of Rupees 25,460\/- was offered by the Collector, 24 Parganas to the claimants as replacement costs of the demolished building.    It appears that the building and structures on the land were   demolished   shortly   after taking possession in  1943.    As   claimants were   not   satisfied   with   the   aforesaid amount so offered to them and there was no agreement between the  parties fixing the amount of compensation,  an Arbitrator was appointed in accordance with the provision  of   the  Requisitioning  and Acquisition   of   Immovable   Property   Act, 1952 for determining the amount of compensation in respect of the said properties.    Before the Arbitrator the claimants filed a Statement of Claim in which they claimed Rs. 29,267\/- as compensation and damages   for   the   demolished   structures with interest   at   the   rate   of   6%    per annum.    Subsequently, they filed another application for  amendment   of claim   in which     they     raised     their     claim     to Rs.  63,265\/- in place of Rs.  29,267\/-   on the    ground    that    the   earlier    amount claimed by them was on the valuation of the  demolished   structures   at   the    rate prevailing in   Jan.   1943   but   that   they were entitled to the compensation at the valuation   rate  prevailing  in  April   1957. Thereafter,   both   the   parties   proceeded before  the   Arbitrator   on   the    question whether compensation was to be allowed at the  rate   prevailing   in  Jan.   1943   or April  1957.    The   Arbitrator was of   the view that the   valuation   of  1943   would prevail  and   after  taking into  consideration the evidence on record he raised the total valuation of the building to Rupees<\/p>\n<p>37,422\/-. A depreciation of 30% was given on the said amount and an award was made for Rs. 26,195\/-. Being dissatisfied with the award as made by the Arbitrator, the claimants have preferred this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\"> 2.   Mr. Amarendranath Gupta, learned advocate  with Mr.  Sumit Ghose appearing  for the   appellants  contended  before us that the  learned Arbitrator fell   into error in thinking that the   compensation was to be awarded on the basis of valuation of the demolished structures as obtaining in Jan.   1943.    According   to Mr. Gupta, the valuation ought to have been made at the rate prevailing in 1957, i.e. the  year in which the offer of compensation was made by the Collector to the appellants.     In  this connection he drew our attention to the provisions of Section 8 of Act  (XXX of 1952) and to an  unreported  Bench decision  of this Court in   the case of Union   of India v.  Meher Khan, decided on 12-6-1970, in A. F. O. D. No. 264 of 1959.    He also referred to another Bench decision of this Court in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/415325\/\" id=\"a_1\">Upendra  Kumar Nandy   v.  Union   of India<\/a> .\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\"> 3. Mr. Nani Gopal Das, learned advocate appearing for the respondent submitted that the appellants were not entitled to claim anything more than what was allowed by the award inasmuch as in their petition for reference they stated that Rs. 29,267\/- would be a fair compensation for the demolished building and structures. It was also pointed out by Mr. Das that in their Statement of Claim before the learned Arbitrator they also referred to the aforesaid sum as fair and equitable compensation for the demolished structures. Mr. Das also contended that the report and the evidence of expert Engineer J. Roy who was examined as witness No. 2 for the claimants should not be accepted inasmuch as the learned Arbitrator was justified in disregarding them.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\"> 4. We were taken through the award and other materials on record. In our view, the learned Arbitrator was not justified in thinking that the amount of compensation payable to the claimants would be on the basis of valuation of the demolished structures as on the date of the requisition. A reference to Clause (iv) of Sub-section (2) (b) of Section 8 of Act (XXX) of 1952 may be made. Clause (iv) says :&#8211;&#8220;That the amount of compensation payable for the requisitioning of any property shall consist of damages (other than normal wear and tear) caused to the property during the period of requisition including expenses that may have to be incurred for restoring the property to the condition in which it was at the time of requisition&#8221;. It is thus clear that the compensation must be made on the basis of the value of the demolished structures when the offer of compensation was made i.e. in April 1957 after allowing depreciation for the period the building was in existence since its construction. In this regard, we respectfully agree with the principle as laid down in the unreported Bench decision of this Court referred to above. There can be no manner of doubt that both the parties understood at the time of hearing of the reference before the learned Arbitrator that while the claimants were claiming that the valuation of the property was to be assessed at the rate as in April 1957, other side disputed it on the ground that it must refer to the year of requisition i.e. 1943. In fact, the appellants-claimants filed a petition for amendment of the Statement of Claim before the learned Arbitrator who proceeded on the footing as if such amendment has been allowed. That being so, it would not be open to the respondent to restrict the claim of the appellants to the amount as mentioned in their Statement of Claim and not to the one as stated in their application for amendment for claim.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\"> 5. We may now come to the question as to what would be the fair amount of compensation to be calculated on the basis of the valuation at the rate as obtaining in 1957. Mr. Gupta pinned his faith on the evidence of witness No. 2, J. Roy for the claimants. J. Roy is an Engineer and Valuer. According to his evidence he first inspected the building which according to him was one storied having a staircase room in the first floor on 17-1-1943. At that time he recorded the measurement in his Measurement Book and made his valuation report vide Exts. 2 and 4. Thereafter on being requested by the claimants he made valuation of the same structures following the rates of April 1957, PWD, West Bengal. Exts. 3 and 5. The respondent examined one witness who is expert in valuation work. He submitted a valuation report following the measurements made by the Collector. His valuation refers to the rates as in Jan. 1943. He did<\/p>\n<p>not see the building as per his own evidence inasmuch as the building was demolished    shortly    after    requisition    in 1943.    In our view the learned Arbitrator was justified in disregarding the evidence of witness No. 2, J.  Roy.    One of the  appellants examined   himself   before the learned Arbitrator. It can be gathered  from his evidence  that J.  Roy   took measurement  of the  building just   after the receipt  of the requisition notice   by him.    Requisition notice was   served   on him as it appears on 23-1-1943.   But witness No. 2, J. Roy, says that he inspected the building on 17-1-1943.    He  could not have inspected the building on  17-1-1943 inasmuch  as it is  the positive evidence  of one  of   the  claimants that   he took measurement of the building   after the receipt of the requisition notice.    In such circumstances,    we    cannot    accept the   report   regarding   the   valuation   of J. Roy as trustworthy.    There can be no manner of  doubt that the value  of  the structures rose considerably in 1957 from that of   1943.    In fact,   the witness examined on the side of the respondent has in  his  report  added  50%   over the  rate obtaining in 1942 to arrive, at possible increase in the rate in 1943.    Therefore, on ,the basis of the above report we would be justified  in raising the  value of   the demolished structures     by  50%    on   the valuation as made by the Arbitrator. The learned Arbitrator found  that   the   total valuation of the building in 1943  would be Rs. 37,422\/-.    If we add 50% thereon, we  arrive at the   figure   of Rs.  56,133\/-. Structures were  about  60   years   old   as would appear from the evidence. Having regard to the age of the structures   and state at which those were kept we think we will be justified in allowing a depreciation  at 35%  on the aforesaid   valuation.    The    valuation    of    the    building would thus come to Rs. 36,486.45 p.   The appellants would be entitled  to  get this sum  from   the  respondent.    In  view   of the  fact that the appellants were   given monthly    compensation   at   the   rate   of Rs.  75\/- p.m.  from  the date   of the requisition   till   15-4-1957,    we    allow    no interest.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\"> 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. The appellants would be entitled to get the sum of Rs. 36,486.45 p. from the respondent. The award is modified accordingly. The respondent is to pay Rs. 16,118.45 P. being the enhanced amount to the appellants after deducting Rs. 29,386\/- being the 80 per cent of the Collector&#8217;s award which has already<\/p>\n<p>been withdrawn by the appellants, within six months from this date.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\"> Janah, J.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\"> 7.  I agree.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Calcutta High Court Sudhangsu Kumar Mukherjee And &#8230; vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 21 January, 1977 Equivalent citations: AIR 1978 Cal 130 Author: A Banerjee Bench: A K Janah, A N Banerjee JUDGMENT A.N. Banerjee, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the award made by the Arbitrator on a reference made to him [&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":[22,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-259514","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-calcutta-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Sudhangsu Kumar Mukherjee And ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 21 January, 1977 - 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\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sudhangsu Kumar Mukherjee And ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 21 January, 1977 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977\" \/>\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=\"1977-01-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-01-30T02:48:58+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sudhangsu Kumar Mukherjee And &#8230; vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 21 January, 1977\",\"datePublished\":\"1977-01-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-30T02:48:58+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977\"},\"wordCount\":1640,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Calcutta High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977\",\"name\":\"Sudhangsu Kumar Mukherjee And ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 21 January, 1977 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1977-01-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-30T02:48:58+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sudhangsu Kumar Mukherjee And &#8230; vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 21 January, 1977\"}]},{\"@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":"Sudhangsu Kumar Mukherjee And ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 21 January, 1977 - 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\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sudhangsu Kumar Mukherjee And ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 21 January, 1977 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1977-01-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-01-30T02:48:58+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sudhangsu Kumar Mukherjee And &#8230; vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 21 January, 1977","datePublished":"1977-01-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-30T02:48:58+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977"},"wordCount":1640,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Calcutta High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977","name":"Sudhangsu Kumar Mukherjee And ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 21 January, 1977 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1977-01-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-30T02:48:58+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudhangsu-kumar-mukherjee-and-vs-union-of-india-uoi-on-21-january-1977#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sudhangsu Kumar Mukherjee And &#8230; vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 21 January, 1977"}]},{"@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\/259514","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=259514"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/259514\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=259514"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=259514"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=259514"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}