{"id":37178,"date":"2008-10-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-10-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008"},"modified":"2017-01-13T15:22:15","modified_gmt":"2017-01-13T09:52:15","slug":"muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008","title":{"rendered":"Muhammedali vs Yusaf on 14 October, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Muhammedali vs Yusaf on 14 October, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRFA.No. 508 of 2008()\n\n\n1. MUHAMMEDALI, AGED 60 YEARS,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. YUSAF, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. AMINA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,\n\n3. NABEEZA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMAN\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR\n\n Dated :14\/10\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n                            P.R.RAMAN &amp;\n                  T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,JJ.\n              -------------------------------\n                    R.F.A.NO.508 OF 2008\n             --------------------------------\n               Dated this the 14th day of October, 2008\n\n                              JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>Raman,J.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Appellant is the lst defendant in O.S.No.59\/2004 on the file of<\/p>\n<p>the Sub Court, Ottapalam. It is a suit for partition. Appeal is<\/p>\n<p>directed against the preliminary decree passed in the said suit. As<\/p>\n<p>per the plaint averment, items 1 and 2 of the plaint schedule<\/p>\n<p>properties were acquired by Ussainar under leasehold right and he<\/p>\n<p>purchased jenm right also. After his death, plaintiff and defendants<\/p>\n<p>are co-owners of the property. Plaintiff and defendants are entitled<\/p>\n<p>to 4\/48 shares each, defendants 2 and 3 are entitled to 7\/48 shares<\/p>\n<p>each and 4th defendant is entitled to 6\/48 shares. The lst defendant<\/p>\n<p>is in possession and managing the properties for and on behalf of<\/p>\n<p>other co-owners. Annual income from the properties is Rs.5,000\/-.<\/p>\n<p>Plaintiff claimed share of profit. The 4th defendant-mother died<\/p>\n<p>pending the suit. Defendants 2 and 3 remained ex parte. The lst<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                  -2-<\/span><br \/>\nRFA.No.508\/2008<\/p>\n<p>defendant contested the suit.     He disputed the extent of plaint<\/p>\n<p>schedule item No.1. According to him, the extent is less than 20<\/p>\n<p>cents and not 71 cents as claimed in the plaint. The lst defendant<\/p>\n<p>also said that his personal properties are on the eastern            and<\/p>\n<p>southern side of the plaint schedule item No.1 and the plaintiff has<\/p>\n<p>shown the extent wrongly. There is also a dispute that item No.2 is<\/p>\n<p>not a property of late Ussainar and no one has any right over the<\/p>\n<p>same. After framing necessary issues, the court below proceeded to<\/p>\n<p>decide the    case after taking evidence.     Exts.A1 and A2 were<\/p>\n<p>marked on the side of the plaintiff and Exts.B1 to B3 were marked<\/p>\n<p>on the side of the defendants. The court below found that item No.2<\/p>\n<p>is not available for partition. Neither side has filed any appeal<\/p>\n<p>therefrom. As regards item No.1 the dispute was regarding the<\/p>\n<p>extent of the property. But the court below relegated that issue to be<\/p>\n<p>decided in the final decree proceedings. The plaint item No.1 is<\/p>\n<p>ordered to be divided into 48 equal shares after identifying and<\/p>\n<p>ascertaining its extent and declared that the plaintiff is entitled to 16<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                    -3-<\/span><br \/>\nRFA.No.508\/2008<\/p>\n<p>such shares.      So long as the extent of the shares as per the<\/p>\n<p>preliminary decree is concerned, there is no dispute. However, the<\/p>\n<p>appellant contended that the court below should not have deferred<\/p>\n<p>the consideration of the issue regarding the actual extent available<\/p>\n<p>for partition to the final decree proceedings. According to him, the<\/p>\n<p>eastern boundary shown in the plaint schedule is purambokku.<\/p>\n<p>Therefore unless the extent available under item No.1 of the plaint<\/p>\n<p>schedule is ascertained in the preliminary decree itself, it will be an<\/p>\n<p>idle exercise to relegate the same to the final decree proceedings.<\/p>\n<p>      2. We have heard both sides.\n<\/p>\n<p>      3. It is true that the actual extent available alone is in dispute.<\/p>\n<p>But going by the eastern boundary shown it is only purambokku.<\/p>\n<p>Therefore there is likelihood of a dispute raised even in the matter<\/p>\n<p>of identifying the property. It will not be proper to defer such an<\/p>\n<p>issue for consideration to the final decree stage rather it is desirable<\/p>\n<p>to decide the same now itself, after taking out a Commission by<\/p>\n<p>either side.      As regards the actual extent available under item<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                 -4-<\/span><br \/>\nRFA.No.508\/2008<\/p>\n<p>No.1, if any further evidence is required to be adduced by either<\/p>\n<p>side, it may be permitted. The extent of shares as found by the<\/p>\n<p>court below in the preliminary decree is confirmed. For the limited<\/p>\n<p>purpose of deciding the extent available under item No.1, the<\/p>\n<p>preliminary decree is set aside and the matter is remanded. In all<\/p>\n<p>other respects, the preliminary decree is confirmed.<\/p>\n<p>     Parties to appear before the court below on 4\/11\/2008.<\/p>\n<p>                                                P.R.RAMAN,<br \/>\n                                                 Judge.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                        T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,<br \/>\n                                                    Judge.\n<\/p>\n<p>kcv.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Muhammedali vs Yusaf on 14 October, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RFA.No. 508 of 2008() 1. MUHAMMEDALI, AGED 60 YEARS, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. YUSAF, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, &#8230; Respondent 2. AMINA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, 3. NABEEZA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, For Petitioner :SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH For [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-37178","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Muhammedali vs Yusaf on 14 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\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Muhammedali vs Yusaf on 14 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-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=\"2008-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-13T09:52:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Muhammedali vs Yusaf on 14 October, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-13T09:52:15+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008\"},\"wordCount\":628,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008\",\"name\":\"Muhammedali vs Yusaf on 14 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-13T09:52:15+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Muhammedali vs Yusaf on 14 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:\\\/\\\/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":"Muhammedali vs Yusaf on 14 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\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Muhammedali vs Yusaf on 14 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-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":"2008-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-13T09:52:15+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Muhammedali vs Yusaf on 14 October, 2008","datePublished":"2008-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-13T09:52:15+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008"},"wordCount":628,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008","name":"Muhammedali vs Yusaf on 14 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-13T09:52:15+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/muhammedali-vs-yusaf-on-14-october-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Muhammedali vs Yusaf on 14 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:\/\/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\/37178","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=37178"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/37178\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=37178"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=37178"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=37178"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}