{"id":26381,"date":"2010-10-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-10-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010"},"modified":"2014-05-30T20:19:58","modified_gmt":"2014-05-30T14:49:58","slug":"thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010","title":{"rendered":"Thirunavukkarasu vs Rajendran on 29 October, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Thirunavukkarasu vs Rajendran on 29 October, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 29\/10\/2010\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.BANUMATHI\n\nC.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.359 of 2009\nand\nM.P. (MD) No.2 of 2009\n\nThirunavukkarasu            \t\t...  Petitioner\n\t\t\nVs\n\nRajendran            \t\t\t...  Respondent\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\n\tCivil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of\nIndia against the order dated 30.6.2008 made in I.A.No.9 of 2008 in O.S. No.615\nof 2006 on the file of the First Additional District Munsif, Kumbakonam.\n\n!For Petitioner  ... Ms.Seetha\n                     for M\/s.K.Govindarajan\n^For Respondent  ... Mr.T.V.Sivakumar\n\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tChallenge in this Revision is the order of First Additional District<br \/>\nMunsif, Kumbakonam dated 30.6.2008 in I.A.No.9 of 2008 in O.S.No.615 of 2006<br \/>\nfiled under Rule 76 and Section 151 CPC, declined to send for the documents from<br \/>\nthe office of Public Works Department, Cauvery Division, Kumbakonam.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. The respondent\/plaintiff filed the suit in O.S.No.615 of 2006 on the<br \/>\nfile of the First Additional District Munsif, Kumbakonam for recovery of money<br \/>\non the basis of promissory note, stating that the defendant has borrowed a sum<br \/>\nof Rs.50,000\/- by executing a promissory note on 14.3.2004 agreeing to repay the<br \/>\nsum with interest @ 12% p.a.,.  The defendant has resisted the suit by a filing<br \/>\nwritten statement denying the execution of the promissory note.  In the written<br \/>\nstatement, the defendant has raised a plea of forgery and contended that the<br \/>\ndefendant&#8217;s signature in the promissory note was fabricated.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. After framing of issues, PW.1 was examined and when PW.1 was in the<br \/>\nbox, the defendant filed the petition in I.A.No.9 of 1998 under Civil Rules of<br \/>\nPractice 76 to send for certain documents from the Public Works Department<br \/>\n(Cauvery Division), Kumbakonam such as (i) Payment Register for the month of<br \/>\nFebruary 2004 where the defendant put his signature for payment; (ii) Leave<br \/>\nApplication of the defendant dated 14.9.2004, from the office of the Public<br \/>\nWorks Department, Cauvery Division, Kumbakonam in which he is working.<br \/>\nAccording to the defendant, these documents which are in the custody of the<br \/>\nPublic Works Department are required for comparison of his signature found in<br \/>\nthe promissory note.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. Learned First Additional District Munsif held that there are no valid<br \/>\nreasons to send for the documents for cross-examination of PW.1 for comparing<br \/>\nthe signature with the pronote and pointing out that those documents are not<br \/>\nnecessary, dismissed the said application.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. Challenging the impugned order, the learned counsel appearing for the<br \/>\nrevision petitioner has submitted that the learned District Munsif has not<br \/>\npassed a detailed order but in one line stated that &#8220;there are no valid reasons<br \/>\nto send for the documents&#8221;.  It was further submitted that the learned District<br \/>\nMunsif erred in saying that the documents are not necessary for cross-<br \/>\nexamination of PW.1 and the Trial Court ought to have sent for the documents in<br \/>\nthe light of the defence plea of forgery taken in the written statement.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t 6. Drawing the Court&#8217;s attention to Civil Rules of Practice 75(2), the<br \/>\nlearned counsel appearing for the respondent\/plaintiff submitted that the<br \/>\napplication ought to have been filed in the prescribed format and a verified<br \/>\napplication under CRP 75 (2) ought to have been filed and as such, the<br \/>\napplication was not maintainable.  It was further submitted that the defendant<br \/>\ncannot seek to send for documents to confront PW.1\/plaintiff with reference to<br \/>\nthe defendant&#8217;s documents.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. The application to send for the documents has been filed by the<br \/>\ndefendant under Rule 76 of Civil Rules of Practice.  As rightly pointed out by<br \/>\nthe learned counsel for the respondent\/plaintiff, the application ought to have<br \/>\nbeen filed under CRP 75(2).  CRP 75 deals with the production of records in the<br \/>\ncustody of a public officer other than a court.  For issuance of summons for the<br \/>\nproduction of the records in the custody of Public Officer, an application as<br \/>\ncontemplated under Rule 75 (2) has to be filed.  CRP 75(2) reads as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<p>75. Production of records in the custody of a public officer other than a court-<br \/>\n\t(1) &#8230;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(2) Every application for such summons shall be made by a verified<br \/>\npetition stating that (i) the document or documents the production of which is<br \/>\nrequired; (ii) the relevancy of the document or documents; and (iii) in cases<br \/>\nwhere the production of a certified copy would answer the purpose whether<br \/>\napplication was made to the proper officer for a certified copy of copies and<br \/>\nthe result of such application.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8.\tAs per 75 (3) CRP, no Court, shall issue such summons unless it<br \/>\nconsiders the production of the original is necessary or is satisfied that the<br \/>\napplication for a Certified Copy has been duly made and has not been granted.<br \/>\nBefore issuing summons, in every case, the Court shall record its reasons in<br \/>\nwriting for issuance of summons. As contended by the learned counsel for the<br \/>\nrespondent, the application filed before the District Munsif in I.A.No.9 of 2008<br \/>\nis not in the prescribed format as stipulated under CRP 75 (2).  In the absence<br \/>\nof verified application being filed, the learned District Munsif rightly<br \/>\ndismissed the application.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9. Of course, the defendant has taken a plea of forgery.  In order to<br \/>\nsubstantiate the plea of forgery, the defendant can very well produce every<br \/>\ndocuments which are in his custody containing his signature.  It need not<br \/>\nnecessarily be the documents from the Public Works Department where he has been<br \/>\nworking.\tThat apart, to substantiate his plea of forgery, defendant can also<br \/>\nadduce other oral and documentary evidence.  Since there are other efficacious<br \/>\nways to establish the defence plea of forgery,  the learned District Munsif,<br \/>\nrightly dismissed the application.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the Revision<br \/>\nPetitioner, the learned District Munsif has not elaborated the reasoning for<br \/>\ndismissal of the application but omission to give  elaborate reasoning cannot be<br \/>\nthe ground for  interference with the order of the learned District Munsif.  The<br \/>\nimpugned order does not suffer from any serious error calling for any<br \/>\ninterference.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11. In the result, the order dated 30.6.2008 made in I.A.No.9 of 2008 in<br \/>\nO.S. No.615 of 2006 on the file of the First Additional District Munsif,<br \/>\nKumbakonam is confirmed and the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed.  The<br \/>\nlearned District Munsif is directed to proceed with the suit in O.S.No.615 of<br \/>\n2006 and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible after affording<br \/>\nsufficient opportunity to both the parties.  No order as to costs.  Connected<br \/>\nMiscellaneous Petition is closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>asvm<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>The First Additional<br \/>\nDistrict Munsif,<br \/>\nKumbakonam.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Thirunavukkarasu vs Rajendran on 29 October, 2010 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29\/10\/2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.BANUMATHI C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.359 of 2009 and M.P. (MD) No.2 of 2009 Thirunavukkarasu &#8230; Petitioner Vs Rajendran &#8230; Respondent Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the [&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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-26381","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Thirunavukkarasu vs Rajendran on 29 October, 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\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Thirunavukkarasu vs Rajendran on 29 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-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=\"2010-10-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-05-30T14:49:58+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=\"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\\\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Thirunavukkarasu vs Rajendran on 29 October, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-05-30T14:49:58+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010\"},\"wordCount\":984,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010\",\"name\":\"Thirunavukkarasu vs Rajendran on 29 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-05-30T14:49:58+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Thirunavukkarasu vs Rajendran on 29 October, 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":"Thirunavukkarasu vs Rajendran on 29 October, 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\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Thirunavukkarasu vs Rajendran on 29 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-05-30T14:49:58+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Thirunavukkarasu vs Rajendran on 29 October, 2010","datePublished":"2010-10-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-05-30T14:49:58+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010"},"wordCount":984,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010","name":"Thirunavukkarasu vs Rajendran on 29 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-10-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-05-30T14:49:58+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thirunavukkarasu-vs-rajendran-on-29-october-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Thirunavukkarasu vs Rajendran on 29 October, 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\/26381","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=26381"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26381\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=26381"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=26381"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=26381"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}