{"id":271439,"date":"2011-02-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-02-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011"},"modified":"2017-08-15T11:32:16","modified_gmt":"2017-08-15T06:02:16","slug":"anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011","title":{"rendered":"Anil Kumar Srivastava vs Shri Satbir Singh Manku on 4 February, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court<\/div>\n
Anil Kumar Srivastava vs Shri Satbir Singh Manku on 4 February, 2011<\/div>\n
Author: Indermeet Kaur<\/div>\n
A-5\n      *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI\n\n\n%                              Date of Judgment: 04.02.2011\n\n\n\n+ RSA No.72\/2005 & CM No.4789\/2005 & CMNo.1448\/2010\n\n\n\nANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA                ...........Appellant\n             Through:          Mr. S.N.Kumar Sr. Advocate with\n                               Mr. S.K.Gupta, Advocate.\n\n                   Versus\n\nSHRI SATBIR SINGH MANKU            ..........Respondent\n               Through: Mr.Laliet Kumar and Mr.Deepak\n                        Vohra, Advocates.\n\n\n\nCORAM:\nHON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR\n\n     1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to\n        see the judgment?\n\n     2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?               Yes\n\n     3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?\n\n                                                             Yes\n\n\n\nINDERMEET KAUR, J. (Oral)\n<\/pre>\n
1.     This appeal has impugned the judgment and decree dated<\/p>\n
9.3.2005 which has endorsed the finding of the trial judge dated<\/p>\n
8.11.2004 wherein the fate of the two suits i.e. Suit No.573\/2002<\/p>\n
and Suit No.423\/2002 had been sealed.            Suit No.573\/2002 was<\/p>\n
instituted first in time.    This was a suit filed by Anil Kumar<\/p>\n
Srivastva (hereinafter referred to ‘as the appellant’) seeking<\/p>\n
declaration to the effect that the document Ex.PW-1\/C which was a<\/p>\n
rent deed dated 29.11.2001 purported to have been executed<\/p>\n
RSA No.72\/2005                                              Page 1 of 5<\/span>
\n between the appellant and Satbir Singh             Manku (hereinafter<\/p>\n
referred to as ‘the respondent’) be declared null and void.               The<\/p>\n
contention was that the compromise recorded between the<\/p>\n
appellant   and   the   respondent    in   an   earlier   suit    i.e.    suit<\/p>\n
No.422\/2001 on 03.12.2001 was a fraudulent transaction as the<\/p>\n
counsel purported to have been appearing on behalf of the<\/p>\n
appellant had never been authorized to make a statement that the<\/p>\n
matter had been compromised.         Attention has been drawn to the<\/p>\n
order dated 03.12.2001 passed in suit No.422\/2001. It is pointed<\/p>\n
out that in the said suit proceedings a compromise had been<\/p>\n
recorded by the Presiding Officer without taking on record any<\/p>\n
application under Order 23 Rule 3 of the Code which is a mandate;<\/p>\n
an oral compromise could not have been recorded; a fraud had<\/p>\n
been played upon the Court. The appellant had never authorized<\/p>\n
his advocate to enter into this compromise and in fact criminal<\/p>\n
proceedings had been initiated against the said advocate on this<\/p>\n
score.\n<\/p>\n
2.    The second suit was suit No.423\/3003 which has been filed<\/p>\n
by the respondent seeking possession and ejectment of the<\/p>\n
appellant from the suit property.\n<\/p>\n
3.    The suit property is a shop in premises bearing No. 80,<\/p>\n
Furniture Block, W.H.S., Kirti Nagar, New Delhi which is in<\/p>\n
occupation of the defendant since 1995 as a tenant at the rental of<\/p>\n
Rs.1000\/- per month.        In terms of the compromise dated<\/p>\n
03.12.2011 recorded in Suit No.422\/2001 the monthly rent had<\/p>\n
been enhanced to Rs.12000\/- per month. It was on the basis of this<\/p>\n
compromise that the present suit for possession had been filed.<\/p>\n
4.    Both the Courts below had decreed the suit of the respondent<\/p>\n
RSA No.72\/2005                                                   Page 2 of 5<\/span>
\n i.e. Suit No.423\/2002 and dismissed the suit of the appellant i.e.<\/p>\n
Suit No.573\/2002.            These are two concurrent findings of fact<\/p>\n
against the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
5.    This is a second appeal.                 On behalf of the appellant, it has<\/p>\n
been urged that the compromise dated 03.12.2001 is vitiated by<\/p>\n
fraud and this is prima facie evident from the fact that criminal<\/p>\n
proceedings had been initiated against the said advocate who had<\/p>\n
allegedly entered into this compromise on behalf of the appellant.<\/p>\n
It is pointed out that the onus to discharge issue no.1 was wrongly<\/p>\n
placed upon the defendant and should have been upon the plaintiff.<\/p>\n
Learned counsel for the appellant to substantiate this argument<\/p>\n
has placed reliance upon AIR 2007 SC 1808                             Makhan Singh Vs.<\/p>\n
Kulwant Singh to submit that when the onus has been wrongly<\/p>\n
placed in an issue, interference is called for even at the second<\/p>\n
appellate stage.\n<\/p>\n
6.    Issues were framed on the pleadings of the parties.                               Issue<\/p>\n
No.1 which was the crucial issue; reads as follows:<\/p>\n
      “Whether the rent deed dated 29.11.01 was signed by the plaintiff under
\n      misrepresentation and whether it is liable to be declared as null and void as prayed
\n      by the defendant? OPD”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
7.    The defence on behalf of the appellant all along as is evident<\/p>\n
from the written was that the rent deed dated 29.11.2001 had been<\/p>\n
signed by him under misrepresentation and is liable to be declared<\/p>\n
as null and void.         In this light, the onus was rightly placed upon<\/p>\n
the appellant. There is no fault on this score. Even otherwise the<\/p>\n
record shows that the appellant\/defendant had in fact admitted this<\/p>\n
document.        In his cross-examination the appellant Anil Kumar<\/p>\n
(examined as DW-1) had admitted that Ex.PW-1\/C (rent agreement<\/p>\n
dated 29.11.2001) bears his signature at point A and he has signed
\nRSA No.72\/2005                                                                      Page 3 of 5<\/span>
\n this document at his shop; his signature at point A were not<\/p>\n
obtained from him forcibly.          This was exhibited in the cross-<\/p>\n
examination      of   the   appellant    effected   on   29.5.2004.          The<\/p>\n
contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that where the<\/p>\n
party who had signed a document does not know its contents the<\/p>\n
same is not binding upon him and for which reliance has been<\/p>\n
placed upon (1972) 4 SCC 481 Rao Saheb Vs. Rangnath Gopalrao<\/p>\n
Kawathekar is clearly misplaced.              Apart from the clear and<\/p>\n
categorical admission of DW-1 as noted hereinabove, DW-1 had<\/p>\n
further testified that he had studied up to class 6th. Even if DW-1<\/p>\n
did not have a degree in his pocket there is nothing whatsoever to<\/p>\n
suggest that he did not understand the contents of the document<\/p>\n
Ex.PW-1\/C which he had admitted to have signed                 in his shop<\/p>\n
without any force.          Testimony of PW-2 Dinesh Kumar, Record<\/p>\n
Clerk from Sales Tax Department recorded in Suit No.423\/2006 is<\/p>\n
also a relevant piece of evidence to decide this argument of the<\/p>\n
appellant.       PW-2 was an official witness; he has stated that<\/p>\n
document Ex.PW-1\/C          (the rent agreement dated 29.11.2001) was<\/p>\n
submitted before their department by the appellant on 02.5.2002<\/p>\n
for the change of his address.          This version of PW-2 also clarified<\/p>\n
that the appellant himself was relying upon this document; no<\/p>\n
challenge to this document is left on any score.<\/p>\n
8.    In this view of the matter, the finding in the impugned<\/p>\n
judgment     (para    13)    that   there   was     no   evidence     oral        or<\/p>\n
documentary to show that this rent agreement had entered the<\/p>\n
arena of doubt was a correct finding.             The impugned judgment<\/p>\n
correctly noted that the terms of this agreement are to be read and<\/p>\n
if this agreement is read the case of the appellant is knocked out.<\/p>\n
RSA No.72\/2005                                                      Page 4 of 5<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
 9.    The substantial questions of law have been formulated on<\/p>\n
page 11 of the appeal.   No such substantial question of law has<\/p>\n
arisen. Appeal as also the pending applications are dismissed in<\/p>\n
limine.\n<\/p>\n
\n
                                        INDERMEET KAUR, J.\n<\/p>\n
FEBRAURY 04, 2011
\nnandan<\/p>\n
RSA No.72\/2005                                        Page 5 of 5<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court Anil Kumar Srivastava vs Shri Satbir Singh Manku on 4 February, 2011 Author: Indermeet Kaur A-5 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Judgment: 04.02.2011 + RSA No.72\/2005 & CM No.4789\/2005 & CMNo.1448\/2010 ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ………..Appellant Through: Mr. S.N.Kumar Sr. Advocate with Mr. S.K.Gupta, Advocate. Versus […]<\/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":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-271439","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAnil Kumar Srivastava vs Shri Satbir Singh Manku on 4 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Anil Kumar Srivastava vs Shri Satbir Singh Manku on 4 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-02-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-08-15T06:02:16+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Anil Kumar Srivastava vs Shri Satbir Singh Manku on 4 February, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-02-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-15T06:02:16+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1023,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011\",\"name\":\"Anil Kumar Srivastava vs Shri Satbir Singh Manku on 4 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-02-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-15T06:02:16+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Anil Kumar Srivastava vs Shri Satbir Singh Manku on 4 February, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"Anil Kumar Srivastava vs Shri Satbir Singh Manku on 4 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Anil Kumar Srivastava vs Shri Satbir Singh Manku on 4 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-02-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-08-15T06:02:16+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Anil Kumar Srivastava vs Shri Satbir Singh Manku on 4 February, 2011","datePublished":"2011-02-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-15T06:02:16+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011"},"wordCount":1023,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011","name":"Anil Kumar Srivastava vs Shri Satbir Singh Manku on 4 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-02-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-15T06:02:16+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anil-kumar-srivastava-vs-shri-satbir-singh-manku-on-4-february-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Anil Kumar Srivastava vs Shri Satbir Singh Manku on 4 February, 2011"}]},{"@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\/271439","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=271439"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271439\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=271439"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=271439"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=271439"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}