{"id":40973,"date":"2010-09-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010"},"modified":"2015-06-22T02:21:24","modified_gmt":"2015-06-21T20:51:24","slug":"ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"Ajay Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors vs Ashok Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors on 24 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Patna High Court &#8211; Orders<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Ajay Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors vs Ashok Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors on 24 September, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA\n                        FA No.226 of 2005\n                     AJAY KUMAR YADAV &amp; ORS\n                              Versus\n                    ASHOK KUMAR YADAV &amp; ORS\n                            -----------\n                                  ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>15.   24.09.2010.             Heard the learned counsels for the parties on the<\/p>\n<p>                    Interlocutory Application No.4476 of 2005 filed on behalf of<\/p>\n<p>                    the appellant under Order 39 Rule 1 &amp; 2 praying therein to<\/p>\n<p>                    restrain the respondents from selling the suit properties.<\/p>\n<p>                              (2) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the<\/p>\n<p>                    appellant submitted that the respondents are trying to sell the<\/p>\n<p>                    suit property and negotiating with outsiders.        On the other<\/p>\n<p>                    hand, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that<\/p>\n<p>                    there is no question of selling the suit property and the<\/p>\n<p>                    statements made by the appellant is entirely false.          At the<\/p>\n<p>                    time of hearing of the injunction application, the learned<\/p>\n<p>                    counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.4 submitted<\/p>\n<p>                    that he is not intending to sell any property, however, the<\/p>\n<p>                    learned counsel submitted that the plaintiff suit for partition<\/p>\n<p>                    has been dismissed by the Court below on the ground that<\/p>\n<p>                    there had already been partition between the parties, and,<\/p>\n<p>                    therefore, no prima facie case is made out and injunction<\/p>\n<p>                    cannot be granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>                              (3) From perusal of the sale deeds annexed by the<\/p>\n<p>                    respondents   in   the   counter   affidavit   to   the   injunction<\/p>\n<p>                    application, it appears that in those sale deeds the plaintiff<\/p>\n<p>                    has clearly mentioned that there had been amicable partition<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                     2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>between     the   parties   and   the   property   is   in   exclusive<\/p>\n<p>possession of the appellant and, therefore, he sold the<\/p>\n<p>properties.\n<\/p>\n<p>            (4) From perusal of the impugned Judgment also, it<\/p>\n<p>appears that the sale deeds executed by the plaintiff-<\/p>\n<p>appellant were filed by the defendants which were             marked<\/p>\n<p>Exhibit.     It further appears that these sale deeds were<\/p>\n<p>executed during the pendency of the suit itself. The learned<\/p>\n<p>Court below considered these statements made by the<\/p>\n<p>appellant in these sale deeds to the effect that there has been<\/p>\n<p>partition between the parties and he is in exclusive possession<\/p>\n<p>of the property and then he sold the property by various sale<\/p>\n<p>deeds.     Therefore, prima facie, it appears that the appellant<\/p>\n<p>has admitted previous partition and the learned court below<\/p>\n<p>has dismissed the suit for partition on that ground. If further<\/p>\n<p>appears that during this long period, there is no instances of<\/p>\n<p>selling of any property by the respondent whereas appellant<\/p>\n<p>has sold many properties during the pendency of the suit.<\/p>\n<p>Further, the respondents denied the allegation of selling.<\/p>\n<p>            (5) I, therefore, find that the plaintiff-appellant has<\/p>\n<p>got no prima facie case and balance of connivance is also not<\/p>\n<p>in his favour. In view of the above facts and circumstances of<\/p>\n<p>the case, there is no question of any loss to the appellant<\/p>\n<p>arises.\n<\/p>\n<p>            (6) I, therefore, find no merit in this Injunction<\/p>\n<p>application and accordingly, this injunction application, i.e.<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                    3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>I.A. No. 4476 of 2005 is rejected.\n<\/p>\n<p>          (7) Heard the learned counsels for the parties on<\/p>\n<p>I.A. No.3900 of 2006 filed by the appellant under Order 40<\/p>\n<p>Rule 1 C.P.C. for appointment of Receivers.<\/p>\n<p>          (8) From perusal of the application, it appears that<\/p>\n<p>prayer for appointment of receiver has been made on the<\/p>\n<p>ground that respondents are enjoying the suit properties to<\/p>\n<p>the exclusion of the appellant and they are not paying a single<\/p>\n<p>farthing to the appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>          (9) It is well-settled principal of law that the object<\/p>\n<p>of appointing a receiver is to protect and preserve and<\/p>\n<p>manage property during pendecy of a suit and it is recognized<\/p>\n<p>as one of the harshest remedies.           For appointment of<\/p>\n<p>receiver, the appellant has to prove strong prima facie case.<\/p>\n<p>The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that if<\/p>\n<p>receiver is appointed, no harm will be caused to the<\/p>\n<p>respondent. In my opinion, the mere circumstances that the<\/p>\n<p>appointment of a receiver will do no harm to anyone is not a<\/p>\n<p>ground for appointing receiver.      In this case as discussed<\/p>\n<p>above while deciding the injunction application, it was found<\/p>\n<p>that the plaintiff has got no prima facie case and, therefore, in<\/p>\n<p>my opinion, this finding will apply in this Interlocutory<\/p>\n<p>Application for appointment of receiver also.       There is no<\/p>\n<p>averment regarding wastage or damage caused by the<\/p>\n<p>respondents to the properties.\n<\/p>\n<p>          (10) As has been stated above, the plaintiff suit has<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                 4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>           been dismissed finding that there had already been previous<\/p>\n<p>           partition.    That finding is based on the admission of the<\/p>\n<p>           appellant made in the registered sale deeds executed by him<\/p>\n<p>           during the pendency of the suit. Therefore, prima facie case<\/p>\n<p>           is against the appellant. Accordingly, I find that this is not a<\/p>\n<p>           fit case for appointment of receiver.\n<\/p>\n<p>                        (11) In the result, the receiver application, i.e., I.A.<\/p>\n<p>           No.3900 of 2006 is hereby rejected.\n<\/p>\n<p>                        (12) Heard the parties on I.A. No.5500 of 2006.<\/p>\n<p>                        (13) This application has been filed under Section<\/p>\n<p>           151 C.P.C. by the appellant praying therein to allow the<\/p>\n<p>           appellant to put a sine board on the properties mentioning<\/p>\n<p>           therein that the properties are the subject matter of First<\/p>\n<p>           Appeal pending before this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>                        (14) From perusal of the application, it appears that<\/p>\n<p>           the same set of statements have been made which have been<\/p>\n<p>           made in the injunction application and receiver application. In<\/p>\n<p>           my opinion, the relief prayed for by the appellant is not<\/p>\n<p>           warranted in this case in view of the above findings. In the<\/p>\n<p>           interest of justice, no such relief could be given to the<\/p>\n<p>           appellant. Accordingly, this application, i.e., I.A. No. 5500 of<\/p>\n<p>           2006 is also rejected.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>                                      ( Mungeshwar Sahoo, J.)<br \/>\nSanjeev\/\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Patna High Court &#8211; Orders Ajay Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors vs Ashok Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors on 24 September, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA FA No.226 of 2005 AJAY KUMAR YADAV &amp; ORS Versus ASHOK KUMAR YADAV &amp; ORS &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211; ORDER 15. 24.09.2010. Heard the learned counsels for the parties on [&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":[8,27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-40973","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-patna-high-court-orders"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Ajay Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors vs Ashok Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors on 24 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ajay Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors vs Ashok Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors on 24 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-09-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-06-21T20:51:24+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ajay Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors vs Ashok Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors on 24 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-06-21T20:51:24+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":902,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Patna High Court - Orders\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010\",\"name\":\"Ajay Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors vs Ashok Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors on 24 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-06-21T20:51:24+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ajay Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors vs Ashok Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors on 24 September, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ajay Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors vs Ashok Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors on 24 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ajay Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors vs Ashok Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors on 24 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-06-21T20:51:24+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ajay Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors vs Ashok Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors on 24 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-06-21T20:51:24+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010"},"wordCount":902,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Patna High Court - Orders"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010","name":"Ajay Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors vs Ashok Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors on 24 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-06-21T20:51:24+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ajay-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-vs-ashok-kumar-yadav-amp-ors-on-24-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ajay Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors vs Ashok Kumar Yadav &amp;Amp; Ors on 24 September, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40973","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=40973"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40973\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=40973"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=40973"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=40973"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}