{"id":46003,"date":"2009-10-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009"},"modified":"2016-05-05T21:17:41","modified_gmt":"2016-05-05T15:47:41","slug":"kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"Kuldip Kumar vs Naresh Kumar Gupta And Others on 6 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Kuldip Kumar vs Naresh Kumar Gupta And Others on 6 October, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH\n\n\nF.A.O. No. 574 and 575 of 2007 (O&amp;M)\n\nDate of decision: October 06, 2009\n\nKuldip Kumar\n                                                       .. Appellant\n\n                  Vs.\n\nNaresh Kumar Gupta and others\n                                                       .. Respondents\n\nCoram:      Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal\n\nPresent:    Mr. R.K. Kanwal, Advocate for\n            Mr. Sanjiv Pandit, Advocate for the appellant.\n            Mr. H.S. Bedi, Advocate for the respondents No.3 and 4.\n\nA.N. Jindal, J\n            This judgment of mine shall dispose of two connected appeals\ni.e. F.A.O. Nos. 574-75 of 2007, having arisen out of the same judgment\ndated 20.2.2006 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalandhar,\nawarding compensation as under :-\n\n\n                   Case No.\/ Title                         Compensation\nMACT Case No.17 dated 19.2.2003, Naresh Kumar Gupta         Rs.1,00,000\/-\nand another vs. Nitin Dada and others\nMACT Case No.18 dated 19.2.2003, Naresh Kumar Gupta          Rs.60,000\/-\nvs. Nitin Dada and others\n\n\n\n            The Tribunal had also awarded interest @ 9% per annum each\non the award amount.\n            Brief resume of facts is that on 26.4.2000, at about 10.15 p.m.\nUdit Gupta son of Naresh Kumar Gupta was returning to his house from\nJalandhar city on cycle and reached near Boor Mandi. In the meantime,\nNaresh Kumar Gupta also came along with his daughter Priyanka and niece\nGunjan alias Mittu on scooter bearing registration No.PB-08-T-6838.\nNaresh Kumar Gupta turned the scooter from the chowk of Boor Mandi for\ngoing to Jalandhar Cantt, in the meantime, the appellant Kuldip Kumar\nwhile driving Tata Chassis No.412050 CZZ-108041 rashly and negligently\ncame from the side of Rama Mandi. Naresh Kumar Gupta stopped the\n F.A.O. No. 574 and 575 of 2007 (O&amp;M)                                 -2-\n\n                                    ***\n<\/pre>\n<p>scooter while taking towards footpath, but Kuldip Kumar while driving the<br \/>\naforesaid Tata Chassis struck against the scooter and dragged it to a<br \/>\ndistance. Resultantly, Naresh Kumar Gupta, his daughter Priyanka Gupta<br \/>\nand Gunjan alias Mittu (non-appellant) suffered injuries.         Ultimately,<br \/>\nPriyanka Gupta succumbed to her injuries.        Naresh Kumar Gupta was<br \/>\nshifted to military hospital Jalandhar Cantt, whereas, Priyanka was taken to<br \/>\nGuru Nanak Mission Hospital, Jalandhar and Gunjan was admitted in<br \/>\nSatyam Hospital, Jalandhar. The accident took place on account of the fault<br \/>\non the part of Kuldip Kumar respondent No.2 (now appellant in FAO No.<br \/>\n575 of 2007). Naresh Kumar Gupta and his wife Veena Gupta claimed<br \/>\ncompensation on account of the death of their daughter Priyanka Gupta<br \/>\naged about 11 years, stating that she was a medical student and after study,<br \/>\nshe would have become a doctor. Similarly, Naresh Kumar Gupta also filed<br \/>\na separate claim petition claiming compensation for the injuries suffered by<br \/>\nhim.\n<\/p>\n<p>            Both the claim petitions were contested by the appellant,<br \/>\nrespondents No.1, 1A, 2 and 3.       The respondents No.1 and 1A (now<br \/>\nrespondents No.3 and 4) contested the claim petition urging that they had<br \/>\nalready sold the Tata Chassis to Un-Employed Bus Service through its<br \/>\nproprietor Jagdish Chand and delivery was given to Kuldip Kumar<br \/>\nrepresentative of Golden Body Builders. As such, after the vehicle was<br \/>\ndelivered through proper documentation to Kuldip Kumar, on the<br \/>\ninstructions of Un-Employed Bus Service, the respondent No.1 ceases to be<br \/>\nthe owner\/controller of the offending vehicle and is not responsible for the<br \/>\nalleged accident. He also pleaded for dismissal of the claim petition being<br \/>\nbad for non joinder of necessary parties. It was further reiterated that<br \/>\nJagdish Chand proprietor of Un-Employed Bus Service on whose direction<br \/>\nthe gate pass was prepared with regard to the vehicle in question for<br \/>\nhanding over the same to Janak Raj, Proprietor of Golden Body Builders,<br \/>\nBye Pass, G.T. Road, Jalandhar, for building the chassis are the necessary<br \/>\nparties.   Kuldip Kumar was the representative of M\/s Golden Body<br \/>\nBuilders. The said chassis was purchased by the Un-Employed Bus Service<br \/>\nand Kuldip Kumar was taking the chassis on behalf of Jagdish Chand and<br \/>\nJanak Raj. Thus, they denied their liability to the pay the compensation.\n<\/p>\n<pre> F.A.O. No. 574 and 575 of 2007 (O&amp;M)                                  -3-\n\n                                     ***\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>             The appellant-Kuldip Kumar in his written statement has<br \/>\nsubmitted that he was not driving the vehicle at the time of accident, as<br \/>\nsuch, he is not responsible for payment of compensation.\n<\/p>\n<p>             National Insurance Company (insurer of the scooter bearing<br \/>\nregistration No.PB-08-T-6838) in its written statement while admitting<br \/>\nbeing the insurer of the scooter in the name of Naresh Kumar Gupta at the<br \/>\ntime of accident stated that the company is not liable as neither Naresh<br \/>\nKumar Gupta nor Priyanka Gupta comes within the definition of third party.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Jagdish Chand did not put in appearance to contest the claim<br \/>\npetition.   Suraj Dev Dada-respondent No.1-A also contested the claim<br \/>\npetition reiterating the facts as submitted by the respondent No.1.\n<\/p>\n<p>             From the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the<br \/>\nfollowing issues in MACT Case No.17 dated 19.2.2003 :-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>             1.    Whether Miss Priyanka Gupta died in the motor vehicle<br \/>\n                   accident due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle<br \/>\n                   make TATA bearing Chassis No.412050 CZZ-108041<br \/>\n                   being driven by respondent No.2 Kuldip Kumar?OPP\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>             2.    Whether the applicants are the legal heirs of Miss<br \/>\n                   Priyanka Gupta and are entitled to compensation, if so,<br \/>\n                   to what extent and from which of the respondents?OPP\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>             3.    Relief.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>             From the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were<br \/>\nframed in MACT Case No.18 dated 19.2.2003 :-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>             1.    Whether the applicant has received injuries in the motor<br \/>\n                   vehicle accident involving the vehicle make TATA<br \/>\n                   bearing Chassis No.412050 CZZ-108041, being driven<br \/>\n                   by respondent No.2 Kuldip Kumar?OPP\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>             2.    Whether the applicant is entitled to compensation, if so,<br \/>\n                   to what extent and from which of the respondents?OPP\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>             3.    Relief.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>             Both the parties led evidence and ultimately, both the claim<br \/>\npetitions were partly allowed in the aforesaid terms.\n<\/p>\n<pre> F.A.O. No. 574 and 575 of 2007 (O&amp;M)                                -4-\n\n                                    ***\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>            The sole question for consideration is &#8220;whether the vehicle was<br \/>\nowned by the respondent No.1 and 1-A at the time of accident or it was<br \/>\nsold and delivered to Un-Employed Bus Service through Jagdish Chand and<br \/>\ndelivery was taken by Kuldip Kumar on behalf of Un-Employed Bus<br \/>\nService?&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>            The Tribunal has observed that Kuldip Kumar appears to have<br \/>\nnot taken the delivery as he being challaned by the police was acquitted by<br \/>\nthe court. His presence at the time of occurrence has been held to be<br \/>\ndoubtful by the criminal court. Secondly, the supurdari of the offending<br \/>\nvehicle was taken by Suraj Dev Dada respondent No.1-A, on behalf of<br \/>\nhimself and respondent No.1, therefore, they being the owners are<br \/>\nresponsible for the payment of compensation.\n<\/p>\n<p>            Having perused the records of the case, I need to step back to<br \/>\nappreciate the evidence. Naresh Kumar Gupta reiterated the allegations<br \/>\nwhile appearing as PW-1 to prove the accident.        However, the crucial<br \/>\nquestion is &#8220;whether delivery of the vehicle was given to Jagdish Chand and<br \/>\nhe became the owner or respondent No.1 and 1-A still remain the owners of<br \/>\nthe vehicle. It is no denying a fact that the property was not going to the<br \/>\npremises of Jagdish Chand but it was going to the premises of &#8220;Golden<br \/>\nBody Builders&#8221;. Kuldip Kumar appeared in the witness box and denied his<br \/>\nliability, but he was not cross examined by the respondents No.1 and 1-A<br \/>\nthat he was the person employed by the &#8220;Un-Employed Bus Service&#8221; and he<br \/>\nhad taken the delivery of the Chassis in question for and on behalf of Un-<br \/>\nEmployed bus Service or Jagdish Chand.           Learned counsel for the<br \/>\nrespondent No.1 and 1-A has contended that from the testimony of Nitin<br \/>\nDada (RW2), Sanjeev Sehgal (RW3) and Arun Sharma (RW4), it has come<br \/>\non the record that the vehicle was purchased by M\/s Un-Employed Bus<br \/>\nService through Jagdish Chand. But, this fact stands falsified from the<br \/>\ndocumentary evidence. Documents Ex.R1 to R-3 have been brought on the<br \/>\nrecord to prove the sale of the Chassis to M\/s Un-Employed Bus Service,<br \/>\nbut these three documents do not in any way prove the story as set up by the<br \/>\nrespondents No.1 and 1-A. From the perusal of Ex.R1 to R-3, it is not<br \/>\nestablished that the offending vehicle was actually delivered to M\/s Un-<br \/>\nEmployed Bus Service or its proprietor Jagdish Chand. From Ex.R-2 it is<br \/>\n F.A.O. No. 574 and 575 of 2007 (O&amp;M)                                   -5-\n<\/p>\n<p>                                     ***<\/p>\n<p>proved that the vehicle was delivered to Kuldip Kumar but it does not find<br \/>\nmention as to in which capacity he had been delivered the offending<br \/>\nvehicle. It is also not established that he had taken the vehicle as per<br \/>\ndirection of Jagdish Chand proprietor of M\/s Un-Employed Bus Service or<br \/>\nJanak Raj of Golden Body Builders as alleged in the written statement filed<br \/>\nby the respondent No.1 on behalf of the respondent No.1 and 1-A<br \/>\nthemselves. Though, Arun Sharma (RW4) in his affidavit Ex.RW4\/A stated<br \/>\nthat as per the instructions of Jagdish Chand delivery of the vehicle was<br \/>\ngiven to Kuldip Kumar appellant for body building of bus on 24.6.2000, but<br \/>\nno document has been proved in order to show that the delivery of the said<br \/>\nvehicle was taken by Jagdish Chand or Kuldip Kumar was ever authorised<br \/>\nby the respondents No.1 and 1-A to deliver the vehicle to M\/s Un-Employed<br \/>\nBus Service. It is also not established that Jagdish Chand after taking the<br \/>\ndelivery of the vehicle had authorised the respondents No.1 and 1-A to<br \/>\ndeliver the same to Kuldip Kumar. In the absence of any documentary<br \/>\nevidence to the effect that the offending vehicle was ever delivered to<br \/>\nJagdish Chand respondent in lieu of some sale consideration, the             fact<br \/>\nwould remain that the respondents No.1 and 1-A are the owners of the<br \/>\noffending vehicle.\n<\/p>\n<p>            As a matter of fact, the respondent never parted with the<br \/>\nownership of the vehicle as it is established on the file that the respondents<br \/>\nNo.1 and 1-A took the offending vehicle on supurdri when it was involved<br \/>\nin this case of accident. Nitin Dada (RW2) admitted in the application made<br \/>\nfor obtaining the order of supurdari that their company was the owner of the<br \/>\noffending vehicle. From further perusal of the file it also transpires that the<br \/>\nsaid vehicle was taken on supurdari by Suraj Dev Dada after obtaining<br \/>\norders from the court of Mrs. Rajwinder Kaur, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,<br \/>\nJalandhar in case FIR No.50 dated 24.6.2000 i.e. the criminal case reistered<br \/>\nagainst Kuldip Kumar. Had they already sold the said vehicle to Jagdish<br \/>\nChand, then Suraj Dev Dada would not have filed the application for taking<br \/>\nthe vehicle on supurdari. Thus, it stands established beyond doubt that the<br \/>\nrespondents No.1 and 1-A had taken the delivery of the chassis in question<br \/>\nbeing the owner of the same.\n<\/p>\n<pre> F.A.O. No. 574 and 575 of 2007 (O&amp;M)                                 -6-\n\n                                    ***\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>            As regards the liability of Kuldip Kumar, notwithstanding the<br \/>\nfact that he was acquitted in the criminal case vide judgment Ex.R5, but the<br \/>\nTribunal is not bound by the findings as returned by the criminal court.<br \/>\nHowever, ample evidence has come on record that Kuldip Kumar had taken<br \/>\nthe delivery of the vehicle (may be on behalf of the owners) but it is<br \/>\nestablished that the vehicle was being driven by him at the time of accident.<br \/>\nAs such he also cannot be exonerated from the liability as fastened by the<br \/>\nTribunal upon him. As such, findings returned by the Tribunal on issues<br \/>\nNo.1 and 2 stand affirmed.\n<\/p>\n<p>            No other point has been raised.\n<\/p>\n<p>            Consequently, finding no merit in both the appeals, the same<br \/>\nare hereby dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>            A photo copy of this order be placed on the file of the<br \/>\nconnected case.\n<\/p>\n<pre>October 06, 2009                                        (A.N. Jindal)\ndeepak                                                        Judge\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Punjab-Haryana High Court Kuldip Kumar vs Naresh Kumar Gupta And Others on 6 October, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O. No. 574 and 575 of 2007 (O&amp;M) Date of decision: October 06, 2009 Kuldip Kumar .. Appellant Vs. Naresh Kumar Gupta and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon&#8217;ble Mr. Justice [&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":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-46003","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Kuldip Kumar vs Naresh Kumar Gupta And Others on 6 October, 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\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kuldip Kumar vs Naresh Kumar Gupta And Others on 6 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-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=\"2009-10-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-05T15:47:41+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kuldip Kumar vs Naresh Kumar Gupta And Others on 6 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-05T15:47:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1635,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009\",\"name\":\"Kuldip Kumar vs Naresh Kumar Gupta And Others on 6 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-05T15:47:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kuldip Kumar vs Naresh Kumar Gupta And Others on 6 October, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Kuldip Kumar vs Naresh Kumar Gupta And Others on 6 October, 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\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kuldip Kumar vs Naresh Kumar Gupta And Others on 6 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-05T15:47:41+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kuldip Kumar vs Naresh Kumar Gupta And Others on 6 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-05T15:47:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009"},"wordCount":1635,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009","name":"Kuldip Kumar vs Naresh Kumar Gupta And Others on 6 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-05T15:47:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kuldip-kumar-vs-naresh-kumar-gupta-and-others-on-6-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kuldip Kumar vs Naresh Kumar Gupta And Others on 6 October, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/46003","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=46003"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/46003\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=46003"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=46003"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=46003"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}