{"id":38944,"date":"2009-04-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-04-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009"},"modified":"2019-02-15T05:28:27","modified_gmt":"2019-02-14T23:58:27","slug":"albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009","title":{"rendered":"Albert Raja vs Chandra on 2 April, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Albert Raja vs Chandra on 2 April, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 02\/04\/2009\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL\n\nC.R.P.(PD)MD.No.192 of 2009\nand\nM.P(MD)No.1 of 2009\n\nAlbert Raja\t\t\t...Petitioner\/Petitioner\/Appellant\n\nVs.\n\n1.Chandra\n2.Selva sekar\n3.Selva Sundari\t\t        ... Respondents\/Respondents\/Respondents\n\nPrayer\n\nCivil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil\nProcedure, against the judgment and decree dated 12.09.2008 passed in I.A.No.60\nof 2008 in A.S.No.119 of 2006 on the file of the learned Sub Judge, Tuticorin.\n\n!For Petitioner    ... Mr.S.Kadarkarai\n^For Respondents   ... No appearance\n\n* * * * *\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tThe revision petitioner\/petitioner\/appellant\/plaintiff has preferred this<br \/>\nCivil Revision Petition as against the order dated 12.09.2008 in I.A.No.60 of<br \/>\n2008 in A.S.No.119 of 2006 on the file of the learned Sub Judge, Tuticorin, in<br \/>\ndismissing the application praying for an appointment of an Advocate<br \/>\nCommissioner to measure the first item of the petition property as per the<br \/>\nsettlement deed by noting down the four boundaries and also to measure the<br \/>\nrespondents&#8217; property and to submit a report, with the help of a Surveyor.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. The first appellate Court while passing orders in I.A.No.60 of 2008 has<br \/>\ninter alia opined that the revision petitioner\/plaintiff has not stated proper<br \/>\nreasons as to why to measure the petition property for third time and also the<br \/>\nrespondents&#8217; property for the first time and further that, the application has<br \/>\nbeen filed belatedly and resultantly, dismissed the application.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. According to the learned Counsel for the revision petitioner\/plaintiff,<br \/>\nthe first appellate Court has committed an error in rejecting the application<br \/>\nfor appointment of an Advocate Commissioner on technical grounds however, going<br \/>\ninto the root of the matter and further that, the trial Court has not taken note<br \/>\nof the fact that the respective parties have filed the title deeds and moreover,<br \/>\nthe revision petitioner has also filed patta to prove his possession and title<br \/>\nand in reality, the re-issue of commission with the help of a Surveyor will<br \/>\nfacilitate the Court to decide the issue without any ambiguity and inasmuch as<br \/>\nthe order of the first appellate Court is contrary to law and suffers from<br \/>\nmaterial irregularity in regard to the exercise of jurisdiction, the revision<br \/>\npetition needs to be allowed in the interest of justice.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. In support of the contention that application for appointment of an<br \/>\nAdvocate Commissioner is maintainable before the first appellate Court in law,<br \/>\nthe learned Counsel for the revision petitioner\/plaintiff cites the decision of<br \/>\nthis Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/1898388\/\">PR.Chockalingam v. M.Pichai and<\/a> another reported in 2003 (1) CTC<br \/>\n321, wherein the order of the first appellate Court appointing Commissioner<br \/>\nbefore hearing appeal has been confirmed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. Reliance on the side of the revision petitioner is placed on yet<br \/>\nanother decision of this Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/1089649\/\">Muthuvelu v. Kuttasavu Sethurayar<\/a> reported in<br \/>\n(2001) 3 M.L.J 749 wherein a direction has been issued to the trial Court to<br \/>\nappoint an experienced Advocate Commissioner in order to put an end to<br \/>\ncontroversies and to give finality to resolve the disputes between the parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. At this stage, this Court points out that a report of an Advocate<br \/>\nCommissioner is nothing more than the evidence in the case, its evidential value<br \/>\nis to be judged while scanning and evaluating other evidence, in the considered<br \/>\nopinion of this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. As a matter of fact, a report of an Advocate Commissioner cannot be the<br \/>\nsole basis for arriving at the decision of a case ignoring other evidences.<br \/>\nReally speaking, the aim of appointment of an Advocate Commissioner is not to<br \/>\ncollect evidence, but to elucidate matters which are local in character and it<br \/>\ncan be done only by local investigation at the spot.  Of course, the decision on<br \/>\nmaterial issues can never be led to the commission which must be resolved and<br \/>\ndecided by a Court of law.  The report of the Commissioner must be a piece of<br \/>\nevidence in the case and does not by the Court.  After all, it can be employed<br \/>\nfor the purpose of appreciating evidence  on record.  A Court of law is free to<br \/>\narrive at its own conclusion because of the fact that the report of an Advocate<br \/>\nCommissioner is not binding on it.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8. Admittedly, the revision petitioner\/plaintiff has filed the suit<br \/>\nseeking for a relief of declaration of his exclusive title to the second<br \/>\nschedule land, which is part of first schedule property and for the relief of<br \/>\nconsequential injunction restraining the defendant, his men and agents from<br \/>\ninterfering with his enjoyment of the second schedule property exclusively and<br \/>\nfor mandatory injunction directing the defendant to remove the gate put up on<br \/>\nthe south-east corner of the plaintiff&#8217;s first schedule property south of the<br \/>\nsecond schedule lane etc.<\/p>\n<p>\t9. The trial Court by its judgment dated 20.01.2005 has come to the<br \/>\nconclusion that the revision petitioner\/plaintiff has not proved that the second<br \/>\nschedule property belongs to him and further that he is not in enjoyment of the<br \/>\nsecond schedule property and resultantly, dismissed the suit without costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10. Aggrieved against the judgment and decree of the trial Court passed in<br \/>\nO.S.No.189 of 2002 dated 20.01.2005, the revision petitioner\/plaintiff has filed<br \/>\nA.S.No.119 of 2006 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Tuticorin and<br \/>\nthe same is pending as on date.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11. It is not out of place to point out that the revision<br \/>\npetitioner\/plaintiff in his plaint in O.S.No.189 of 2002 before the trial Court<br \/>\nhas inter alia averred that the respondent\/defendant has high-handedly on<br \/>\n16.01.1998 put up a gate to the breath of 2 feet in the plaint second schedule<br \/>\nproperty on the southern end etc. and that the defendant has no right in the<br \/>\nportions of the land shown in the second schedule and therefore, the revision<br \/>\npetitioner\/plaintiff has filed the suit for declaration of his title to the<br \/>\nsecond schedule land and for consequential injunction restraining the defendant,<br \/>\nhis men and agents from interfering with the plaint second schedule property<br \/>\nexclusively and for a mandatory injunction directing the defendant to remove the<br \/>\ngate put up at the southern end of his second schedule property.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12. The learned Counsel for the revision petitioner brings it to the<br \/>\nnotice of this Court that in C.R.P.No.856 of 2000, this Court has passed orders<br \/>\non 24.03.2000, inter alia observing that &#8216;the present order will not stand in<br \/>\nthe way either for issuance of further commission or to get supplementary<br \/>\nreport&#8217; and resultantly, dismissed the revision petition and this order of the<br \/>\nHigh Court, allows the revision petitioner to file the I.A.No.60 of 2008 praying<br \/>\nfor appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to measure the petition property<br \/>\nreferred to supra with the help of a Surveyor and therefore, the first appellate<br \/>\nCourt is not correct in dismissing the said I.A.No.60 of 2008 for appointment of<br \/>\nan Advocate Commissioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t13. Concededly, one of the issues has been framed by the trial Court to<br \/>\nthe effect that whether plaint second schedule property belongs to the plaintiff<br \/>\netc.  Already the parties have let in oral evidence by examining the witnesses<br \/>\nP.W.1 to P.W.3 and marking Ex.P.1 to P.12 on the plaintiff&#8217;s side and on the<br \/>\ndefendant&#8217;s side, D.W.1 and D.W.2 were examined and Exs.D.1 to D.4 have been<br \/>\nmarked and Ex.C.1 and C.2, the Commissioner&#8217;s report and plan have been marked.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t14. It is to be borne in mind that appeal is a continuation of original<br \/>\nproceedings, viz, that of the suit.  In view of the fact that the appeal<br \/>\nproceedings are pending before the first appellate Court for consideration based<br \/>\non the evidence and documents adduced and marked by the parties before the trial<br \/>\nCourt, this Court is of the considered view that the revision petitioner&#8217;s<br \/>\nprayer for appointment  of an Advocate Commissioner is only to collect evidence<br \/>\nand even though a Court of law has power to appoint an Advocate Commissioner<br \/>\n(based on the overall assessment of the facts and circumstances of the case) at<br \/>\nthe appellate stage, this is not a fit case where this Court can accede to the<br \/>\nrequest of the revision petitioner and in that view of the matter, this Court<br \/>\nsitting in revision is not inclined to allow the present civil revision petition<br \/>\nin the interest of justice exercising its discretion and consequently, dismisses<br \/>\nthe civil revision petition. Resultantly, the connected Miscellaneous Petition<br \/>\nis dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>rsb<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>The Sub Judge, Tuticorin.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Albert Raja vs Chandra on 2 April, 2009 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02\/04\/2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL C.R.P.(PD)MD.No.192 of 2009 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2009 Albert Raja &#8230;Petitioner\/Petitioner\/Appellant Vs. 1.Chandra 2.Selva sekar 3.Selva Sundari &#8230; Respondents\/Respondents\/Respondents Prayer Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Code [&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-38944","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>Albert Raja vs Chandra on 2 April, 2009 - 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\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Albert Raja vs Chandra on 2 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-02-14T23:58:27+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Albert Raja vs Chandra on 2 April, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-14T23:58:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1320,\"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\\\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009\",\"name\":\"Albert Raja vs Chandra on 2 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-14T23:58:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Albert Raja vs Chandra on 2 April, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Albert Raja vs Chandra on 2 April, 2009 - 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\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Albert Raja vs Chandra on 2 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-02-14T23:58:27+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Albert Raja vs Chandra on 2 April, 2009","datePublished":"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-14T23:58:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009"},"wordCount":1320,"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\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009","name":"Albert Raja vs Chandra on 2 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-14T23:58:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/albert-raja-vs-chandra-on-2-april-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Albert Raja vs Chandra on 2 April, 2009"}]},{"@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\/38944","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=38944"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38944\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=38944"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=38944"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=38944"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}