{"id":29221,"date":"2008-10-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-10-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008"},"modified":"2017-06-12T03:16:55","modified_gmt":"2017-06-11T21:46:55","slug":"gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008","title":{"rendered":"Gujarat vs Mandali on 15 October, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Gujarat vs Mandali on 15 October, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Mr. K.S.Radhakrishnan,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Kureshi,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nLPA\/1159\/2008\t 5\/ 5\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nLETTERS\nPATENT APPEAL No. 1159 of 2008\n \n\nIn\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 8271 of 2008\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nLETTERS\nPATENT APPEAL No. 1160 of 2008\n \n\nIn\nSPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8029 of 2008\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nCIVIL\nAPPLICATION No. 11969 of 2008\n \n\nIn\nLETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 1159 of 2008\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nCIVIL\nAPPLICATION No. 11970 of 2008\n \n\nIn\nLETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 1160 of 2008\n \n\n======================================\n\n\n \n\nGUJARAT\nSTATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD &amp; 1 - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nGUJARAT\nLAGHU UDYOG SAHKARI \n\n \n\nMANDALI\nLTD &amp; 2 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n======================================\n \nAppearance : \nMR\nK.G. VAKHARIA &amp; MR. N.D. NANAVATI, SENIOR COUNSEL with           \n                 MR PS CHAMPANERI for Appellant(s) : 1 - 2. \nMR\nTUSHAR MEHTA, SENIOR COUNSEL with MR KETAN D SHAH  for Respondent(s)\n: 1, \nNone for Respondent(s) : 2 -\n3. \n======================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tTHE CHIEF JUSTICE                MR. K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n\t\t\t\t\tDate\n: 15\/10\/2008 \n\n \n\n C.A.V\nORDER \n<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN)<\/p>\n<p>\tGujarat<br \/>\nState Co-operative Bank Limited along with another, who are<br \/>\nappellants in both these cases, challenge interim order passed by the<br \/>\nlearned Single Judge on 30th July, 2008, directing the<br \/>\nBank to allot additional qualifying shares to the petitioners in the<br \/>\nwrit petition, so as to qualify them to context the election to the<br \/>\nBoard of Directors of the Bank under bye-law 26(c) of the Bye-laws.<br \/>\nFirst respondent herein, Ahmedabad District Co-operative Bank Limited<br \/>\nis a member of the Gujarat State Co-operative Milk Producers&#8217; Union<br \/>\nLimited under Clause 4(a) of the Bye-laws of the Bank.  As per<br \/>\nbye-law 26(c), two representatives are elected on the Board of<br \/>\nDirectors of the apex Bank i.e. Gujarat State Co-operative Bank<br \/>\nLimited, from out of industrial and other Co-operative Societies,<br \/>\nwhose paid up share capital is not less than 5 lakhs and has<br \/>\ncontributed to share capital of the Bank to the extent of 1\/20th<br \/>\nof paid up share capital of such Co-operative Society.  Petitioner,<br \/>\nmember of the apex Bank, received a communication dated 8th<br \/>\nMay, 2008, requesting petitioner Society to follow the procedure as<br \/>\nstated therein.  The relevant portion of the communication is<br \/>\nextracted below:-\n<\/p>\n<p>?SAs<br \/>\nper the provisions made in the bye-laws of this Bank, for continuing<br \/>\nthe qualification as a representative on the Board of Directors of<br \/>\nthis Bank, it is necessary that on 31.3.2008 your Institution should<br \/>\nhold the shares of this Bank of the equivalent amount of 1\/20th<br \/>\nportion of the paid up share capital of your institution.  Hence, you<br \/>\nare requested to initiate the procedure for the same.??\n<\/p>\n<p>\tPetitioner<br \/>\nresponded to that letter and informed the apex Bank that they intend<br \/>\nto additionally purchase 540 shares, each one share having value of<br \/>\nRs. 5,000\/-.  Necessary formalities as directed by the apex Bank was<br \/>\ncomplied with, but it is complained that due to extraneous reasons<br \/>\nthe apex Bank is not allotting requisite shares, so that the<br \/>\npetitioner Society can stand for election to the Board of Directors<br \/>\nof the apex Bank.  Reasons stated for not giving additional shares<br \/>\nwas found unacceptable by learned Single Judge and gave a positive<br \/>\ndirection to allot additional qualifying shares to the petitioner so<br \/>\nthat they can contest the election to the Board of Directors of the<br \/>\napex Bank under bye-law 26(c) of the Bye-laws of the Bank.  Aggrieved<br \/>\nby that direction, these appeals have been preferred by the State<br \/>\nCo-operative Bank.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tWe<br \/>\nheard learned counsel for the Bank at length.  Learned counsel<br \/>\nappearing for the appellant Bank submitted that learned Single Judge<br \/>\nwas not justified in giving a positive direction to the Bank, under<br \/>\nArticle 226 of the  Constitution of India, since writ petition itself<br \/>\nwas not maintainable against a Co-operative Bank.  In support of his<br \/>\ncontention, reference was made to the decisions in 2003 (10) SCC 733,<br \/>\n1995 (3) SCC 257 and 1976 GLR 583. Learned counsel for the appellant<br \/>\nalso submitted that granting of interim relief by the learned Single<br \/>\nJudge virtually amounts to allowing the petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.<br \/>\nLearned counsel appearing for the petitioner Society submitted that<br \/>\nthe appellant Bank is one of the principal Co-operative Bank in the<br \/>\nState, established with the object of financing other Co-operative<br \/>\nSocieties and also receives finance by way of loans and advances from<br \/>\nNational Bank of Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD).  Further<br \/>\nit was also stated that the Bank runs on support of the people at<br \/>\nlarge as well as with the support of financial institutions like<br \/>\nNABARD, State Bank of India and other Co-operative Institutions.<br \/>\nLearned counsel submitted that if the member society wants to contest<br \/>\nin the election to the Board of Directors of the apex Bank, it should<br \/>\nacquire necessary shares as provided under bye-law 26(c) of the apex<br \/>\nBank. Petitioner Society was directed to acquire the same by the apex<br \/>\nBank by communication dated 8.5.2008.  Learned counsel also referred<br \/>\nto Section 27 of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 and<br \/>\nsubmitted that no person shall exercise the rights of a member of a<br \/>\nSociety, until he has made such payment to the society in respect of<br \/>\nthe membership, or acquired such interest in the society as may be<br \/>\nprescribed by the Rules and Bye-laws of the Society.  Bye-law 26(c)<br \/>\nstates that two representatives of the Industrial and other<br \/>\nCo-operatives whose paid up share capital is not less than 5 lakhs<br \/>\nand have contributed to the share capital of the apex Bank to the<br \/>\nextent of 1\/20th of the paid up share capital as on 31st<br \/>\nMarch of the preceding year is eligible for contesting as member of<br \/>\nthe Board of Directors.  Learned counsel for the petitioner Society<br \/>\nsubmitted that a statutory obligation casts on the apex Bank to<br \/>\ncomply with Bye-law 26(c) read with Section 27 of the Act, so that<br \/>\npetitioner Society can acquire interest in the society and<br \/>\nconsequentially stand for election.  Learned counsel for the<br \/>\npetitioner  Society also submitted that the term of the Committee is<br \/>\nalready over and prayer for appointment of the Administrator is<br \/>\npending.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tQuestion<br \/>\nas to whether apex Bank has got a statutory obligation under the<br \/>\nabove mentioned Bye-laws read with section 27 of the Act, is a matter<br \/>\nto be considered by the learned Single Judge finally when the writ<br \/>\npetition is disposed of. Submission of learned counsel for the<br \/>\nappellant Bank that granting of interim relief by the learned Single<br \/>\nJudge amounted to allowing the writ petition, cannot be accepted in<br \/>\nthe facts and circumstances of this case, since the term of the<br \/>\nCommittee is already over and prayer for appointment of the<br \/>\nAdministrator is pending, as stated by Counsel for the petitioner.<br \/>\nOnce the election is over without considering the candidature of the<br \/>\npetitioner Society, it will cause considerable prejudice to the<br \/>\nSociety.  That being the facts and legal situation, we see no reason<br \/>\nto interfere with the interim order passed by the learned Single<br \/>\nJudge.  If the petitioner stands for election, the same would be<br \/>\nsubject to the final decision to be taken by this Court in the main<br \/>\nwrit petition pending before the learned Single Judge.  We make it<br \/>\nclear that the opinion expressed by us in this order are only<br \/>\ntentative, which will not influence the learned Single Judge while<br \/>\ndisposing of the matter finally.  With the above observations, both<br \/>\nthe appeals stand dismissed.  Consequently, Civil Applications also<br \/>\nstand dispose of.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tWe<br \/>\nmake it clear that all legal questions raised by the parties with<br \/>\nregard to the maintainability of the writ petition as against the<br \/>\nappellant Bank is left open to be decided by the learned Single<br \/>\nJudge.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t(K.S.\n<\/p>\n<p>Radhakrishnan, C.J.)\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t(Akil<br \/>\nKureshi, J.)<\/p>\n<p>*\/Mohandas<\/p>\n<p>\tAfter<br \/>\npronouncement, learned counsel for the appellant prays for stay of<br \/>\nthis order.  In the facts and circumstances, we see no reason to<br \/>\ngrant stay.  Prayer stands rejected.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t(K.S.<\/p>\n<pre>\nRadhakrishnan, C.J.)\t\t\t\t\t\t\n \n\n\n \n\n\n \n\n\n*\/Mohandas\t\t\t\t\t(Akil\nKureshi, J.)\n \n\n\n \n\n\n\n    \n\n \n\t   \n      \n      \n\t    \n\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\n\t   \n      \n\t  \t    \n\t\t   Top\n\t   \n      \n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Gujarat vs Mandali on 15 October, 2008 Author: Mr. K.S.Radhakrishnan,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Kureshi,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print LPA\/1159\/2008 5\/ 5 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 1159 of 2008 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8271 of 2008 With LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 1160 of [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-29221","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Gujarat vs Mandali on 15 October, 2008 - 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\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Gujarat vs Mandali on 15 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-06-11T21:46:55+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\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Gujarat vs Mandali on 15 October, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-11T21:46:55+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1144,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008\",\"name\":\"Gujarat vs Mandali on 15 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-11T21:46:55+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Gujarat vs Mandali on 15 October, 2008\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Gujarat vs Mandali on 15 October, 2008 - 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\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Gujarat vs Mandali on 15 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-06-11T21:46:55+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\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Gujarat vs Mandali on 15 October, 2008","datePublished":"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-11T21:46:55+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008"},"wordCount":1144,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008","name":"Gujarat vs Mandali on 15 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-11T21:46:55+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gujarat-vs-mandali-on-15-october-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Gujarat vs Mandali on 15 October, 2008"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/29221","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=29221"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29221\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29221"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29221"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29221"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}