{"id":4183,"date":"2010-07-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-07-19T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010"},"modified":"2019-03-16T16:39:38","modified_gmt":"2019-03-16T11:09:38","slug":"union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010","title":{"rendered":"Union vs Indus on 20 July, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Union vs Indus on 20 July, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: M.D. Shah<\/div>\n<pre>  \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n \n \n\n\n\t \n\nFA\/2186\/1996\t 4\/ 6\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nFIRST\nAPPEAL No. 2186 of 1996\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE MD SHAH\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nUNION\nOF INDIA THROUGH EXECUTIVE ENGINEER - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nINDUS\nENGINEERING &amp; CONSTR. CO.THROUGH PARTNER &amp; 1 - Defendant(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMS\nPJ DAVAWALA for\nAppellant(s) : 1, \nMR NM DASTANE for Defendant(s) : 1, \nMRS NISHA\nM PARIKH for Defendant(s) : 1, \nMR PURVISH J MALKAN for\nDefendant(s) : 1, \nMS MANISHA LAVKUMAR for Defendant(s) :\n2, \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\tMR.JUSTICE MD SHAH\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 20\/07\/2010 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>\t\tThis<br \/>\nappeal is filed against the judgment and<br \/>\ndecree dated 30.4.1996 passed by the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad in<br \/>\nCivil Miscellaneous Application No.518 of 1993 whereby the award<br \/>\ndated 17.8.1993 made by the Arbitrator Shri J.Pal in arbitration<br \/>\nproceedings between the claimant and respondent is made Rule of the<br \/>\nCourt, subject to the correction that the figure  25%  appearing<br \/>\nin the sixteen sentence on page five of the award, be read as  50% .\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tThe<br \/>\nfacts of the case are such that the disputes between the parties were<br \/>\nresolved by the Arbitrator on 17.8.1993. Thereafter, the original<br \/>\nclaimant filed an application for directing the Arbitrator to file<br \/>\nthe award dated 17.8.1993 along with the full records pertaining to<br \/>\nthe arbitration and upon filing the same, for proceeding as per<br \/>\nSections 16,17 and 30 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<br \/>\n(hereinafter referred as  the Arbitration Act  for short). On the<br \/>\nnotices having been served upon the parties in the said application,<br \/>\nlearned Arbitrator along with the letter dated 3.9.1993 filed the<br \/>\naward and the documents under Section 14 of the Arbitration Act. The<br \/>\nsame has been registered as Civil Miscellaneous Application No.518 of<br \/>\n1993. The original respondent filed objections to the said award and<br \/>\none of the objections was that the Arbitrator had committed serious<br \/>\narithmetical error in computing the quantum of the award pertaining<br \/>\nto the claims no.1,2,3 and 6. The original claimant requested the<br \/>\nArbitrator by letter dated 14.10.1993 to correct the said mistake<br \/>\nunder Section 13(d) of the said Act and to send the original<br \/>\ncorrection on stamp paper to the City Civil Court in Civil<br \/>\nMiscellaneous Application No.518 of 1993. The Arbitrator, thereafter,<br \/>\ncorrected the figure  25%  appearing in the sentence at page five<br \/>\nof the award as  50%  under Section 13(d) of the Act and sent the<br \/>\noriginal correction on the stamp paper of Rs.100\/- along with the<br \/>\nletter dated 20.10.1993 addressed to the City Civil Court.<br \/>\nThereafter, the original claimant made application Exh.6 in Civil<br \/>\nMiscellaneous Application No.518 of 1993 and prayed to make the<br \/>\ncorrected award rule of the Court. The original respondent raised<br \/>\nobjections against the said correction made by the Arbitrator in the<br \/>\noriginal award under Section 13(d) of the Act without affording it<br \/>\nany opportunity of hearing and requested the court to set aside the<br \/>\nsaid correction in the award made and published on 21.10.1993.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tThe<br \/>\nlearned trial Court, after discussing the evidence and after hearing<br \/>\nlearned advocates for the parties, passed the order as stated above<br \/>\nwhich is challenged in this appeal by the original respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tHeard<br \/>\nthe learned advocates for the parties and perused the judgment of the<br \/>\nlearned trial Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tLearned<br \/>\nadvocate Ms.Davawala appearing for the appellant-original respondent<br \/>\nsubmitted that the Arbitrator had no authority to make any correction<br \/>\nin the award under Section 13 of the Act, when the award was already<br \/>\nfiled in the Court and the validity of the same was already<br \/>\nchallenged by the respondent in the Court and even then the learned<br \/>\ntrial Court accepted the same and corrected the award which is not<br \/>\npermitted under the law and therefore the learned trial Court has<br \/>\ncommitted an error and the order passed by the learned trial Court is<br \/>\nrequired to be quashed and set aside. Ms.Davawala further submitted<br \/>\nthat there are no reasons assigned by the Arbitrator for reducing<br \/>\nloss on the basis of 50% of the full strength overhead cost for first<br \/>\n24 months and so also it cannot be said that 25% mentioned by the<br \/>\nArbitrator is typographical error and therefore also the order passed<br \/>\nby the learned trial Court is bad in law.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tLearned<br \/>\nadvocate Ms.Parikh appearing for the respondent-original claimant<br \/>\nsubmitted that prima facie it seems that 25% mentioned in the award<br \/>\nis typographical mistake because the total calculation was carried<br \/>\nout by the Arbitrator on the basis of 50% and reasons are also<br \/>\nassigned for that and so the learned trial Court has rightly passed<br \/>\nthe order which is not required to be interfered with by this Court.<br \/>\nLearned advocate Ms.Parikh also argued that when reasoned award is<br \/>\npassed by the Arbitrator and is confirmed by the learned City Civil<br \/>\nCourt, this Court has very limited power to interfere with the award<br \/>\nand can interfere only when prima facie it is found that any error in<br \/>\nlaw is committed by the learned trial Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tAt<br \/>\nthis stage, it is pertinent to make reference to Section 16 of the<br \/>\nArbitration Act which reads as under.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tSection<br \/>\n16 :\n<\/p>\n<p> The<br \/>\nCourt may remit the award or any matter referred to the arbitration<br \/>\nto the Arbitrator or umpire for reconsideration, if the case falls<br \/>\nunder any of the three situations namely :\n<\/p>\n<p>(a)Where<br \/>\nthe award has left undetermined any of the matters referred to<br \/>\narbitration, or where it determines any matter not referred to<br \/>\narbitration and such matter cannot be separated without affecting the<br \/>\ndetermination of the matters referred; or <\/p>\n<p>(b)<br \/>\nWhere the award is so indefinite as to be incapable of execution; or <\/p>\n<p>(c)Where<br \/>\nan objection to the legality of the award is apparent upon the face<br \/>\nof it.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tThe<br \/>\nlearned trial Court, after considering this provision, rightly held<br \/>\nthat the Arbitrator has not left the award undetermined nor the award<br \/>\ncould be said to be so indefinite as to be incapable of execution and<br \/>\nso it cannot be remitted to the Arbitrator.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tFurther,<br \/>\nthe Arbitrator calculated the average overhead expenses per month for<br \/>\nnormal working within stipulated time to the extent of Rs.14,267.68<br \/>\nps. The said overhead expenses has been further reduced to the extent<br \/>\nof 75%,50% and 10% on the full strength overhead costs, for the<br \/>\nperiod of 22 months, 24 months and 4 months respectively. The<br \/>\nArbitrator has further made the calculation on the basis of 50% of<br \/>\nthe full strength overhead cost for first 24 months of the period<br \/>\nfrom 20.1.1985 to 12.6.1987 and assigned the reasons for the same but<br \/>\nfigure  25%  is wrongly mentioned which is just typographical<br \/>\nmistake. Therefore, the learned trial Judge, considering the<br \/>\nprovision of Section 15 of the Act which does not contemplate any<br \/>\nformal application from the party and the Court can by order correct<br \/>\nan award which contains any obvious error or a clerical mistake or an<br \/>\nerror arising from an accidental slip or omission, rightly held that<br \/>\nthe mention of  25%  is just an accidental slip and typographical<br \/>\nerror which does not ultimately change the substance in the award and<br \/>\ncorrected the same and made the award of the Arbitrator Rule of<br \/>\nCourt.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tConsidering<br \/>\nthe above factual situation and the provisions of the Arbitration<br \/>\nAct, I am of the opinion that the appellant failed to show any<br \/>\nillegality or perverseness in the order passed by the learned trial<br \/>\nCourt and therefore this appeal deserves to be dismissed and is<br \/>\naccordingly dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(<br \/>\nM.D.Shah, J )<\/p>\n<p>ssrilatha<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Union vs Indus on 20 July, 2010 Bench: M.D. Shah FA\/2186\/1996 4\/ 6 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 2186 of 1996 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 [&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-4183","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 v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Union vs Indus on 20 July, 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\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Union vs Indus on 20 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-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=\"2010-07-19T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-16T11:09:38+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\\\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Union vs Indus on 20 July, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-16T11:09:38+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1121,\"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\\\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010\",\"name\":\"Union vs Indus on 20 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-16T11:09:38+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Union vs Indus on 20 July, 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":"Union vs Indus on 20 July, 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\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Union vs Indus on 20 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-07-19T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-16T11:09:38+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\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Union vs Indus on 20 July, 2010","datePublished":"2010-07-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-16T11:09:38+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010"},"wordCount":1121,"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\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010","name":"Union vs Indus on 20 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-07-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-16T11:09:38+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-vs-indus-on-20-july-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Union vs Indus on 20 July, 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\/4183","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=4183"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4183\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4183"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4183"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4183"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}