{"id":48553,"date":"2008-09-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008"},"modified":"2018-06-17T08:57:25","modified_gmt":"2018-06-17T03:27:25","slug":"ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"M\/S vs Union on 8 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
M\/S vs Union on 8 September, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: K.A.Puj,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice H.Shukla,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/384520\/2008\t 7\/ 7\tORDER\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3845 OF 2008\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3846 OF 2008\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3847 OF 2008\n \n======================================\n \n\nM\/S.\nULTRATECH CEMENT LTD. - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nUNION\nOF INDIA & ORS. - Respondent(s)\n \n\n====================================== \nAppearance\n: \nMr. Gautam M. Gadhavi for\nPetitioner(s). \nNone for Respondent(s) : 1 -\n4. \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 K.A.PUJ\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 08\/09\/2008 \n\n \n\n \nCOMMON\nORAL ORDER<\/pre>\n
(Per
\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ)<\/p>\n
\t\tSince
\na common issue is involved in all these three writ petitions, the
\nsame are taken up for admission hearing together and are disposed of
\nby this common order.\n<\/p>\n
2.\t\tAll
\nthe three petitions were called out in the first session and also in
\nthe second session. The learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner
\nin all the three matters has not remained present in any of the two
\ncalls.\n<\/p>\n
3.\t\tThe
\npetitioner has challenged the order of Customs, Excise and Service
\nTax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad  dated 30th
\nMay, 2007 in Application No. E\/COD\/56\/07, E\/S\/55607, refusing to
\ncondone the delay of more than 800 days in preferring the appeal
\nagainst the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). Similarly, the
\npetitioner has challenged other two orders of the Tribunal passed in
\nother two appeals.\n<\/p>\n
4.\t\tThe
\nbrief facts of the case are that the petitioner is inter
\nalia engaged in the
\nmanufacturing of clinker and cement falling under Chapter 25 of the
\nSchedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.  The petitioner has
\navailed credit of Rs.11,38,719\/- on explosives used in mines under
\nRule 2(g) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002.  The petitioner was
\nissued with show cause notice proposing to deny and recover credit of
\nRs.11,38,719\/- under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944
\navailed on the explosives used in mines.  The show cause notice also
\nproposed to impose penalty on the petitioner under Rule 13(1) of the
\nCenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and proposed to recover interest from the
\npetitioner under Rules 12 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 read with
\nSection 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944.  The petitioner filed
\nits reply to the show cause notice on 14.01.2003 and 19.05.2003. The
\nshow cause notices were adjudicated by the Joint Commissioner of
\nCentral Excise, Bhavnagar and the Joint Commissioner vide
\nhis order dated 16.2.2004 denied the credit on explosives used in
\nmines and confirmed the duty demand of Rs.11,38,719\/- against the
\npetitioner.  The Joint Commissioner also imposed penalty of Rs.1 lakh
\non the petitioner and also ordered recovery of interest.  The Joint
\nCommissioner relied upon the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court
\nin the case of M\/s. J.K. Udaipur Udyog, reported
\nin 2004 (171) ELT 289 (SC).\n<\/p>\n
5.\t\tBeing
\naggrieved by the order of the Joint Commissioner dated 17.08.2004,
\nthe petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Central
\nExcise (Appeals), Rajkot.  During the pendency of the appeal, on
\n27.11.2004, the petitioner reversed the credit taken on the
\nexplosives used in mines following the binding precedent of the
\nHonourable Supreme Court in the case of M\/s. J.K. Udaipur Udyog
\n(supra).  The Commissioner disposed of the appeal
\nfiled by the petitioner on 04.02.2005 reducing the penalty from Rs.1
\nlakh to Rs.10,000\/-.  Since the subject matter of the order passed by
\nthe Commissioner (Appeals) was already decided by the Honourable
\nSupreme Court in the case of M\/s. J.K. Udaipur Udyog
\n(supra), filing of an appeal before the Central Excise and
\nService Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) would have been an empty
\nformality and, therefore, showing due respect to the law of land, the
\npetitioner did not file an appeal against the order dated 04.02.2005
\npassed by the Commissioner (Appeals).\n<\/p>\n
6.
\n\tThe Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Vikram Cement Ltd,
\nreported in 2005 (187) ELT 145 (SC) did not agree with the
\ndecision of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of M\/s.
\nJ.K. Udaipur Udyog (supra) and referred the issue to
\nthe larger Bench on 24.08.2005.  The larger Bench of the Honourable
\nSupreme Court in the case of Vikram Cement Limited,
\nreported in 2006 (194) ELT 3(SC) held on 18.01.2006
\nthat credit is admissible on inputs used in mines.  The Honourable
\nSupreme Court overruled the decision in the case of M\/s. J.K.
\nUdaipur Udyog (supra).\n<\/p>\n
7.
\n\t\tHaving come to know about the decision of Honourable Supreme Court
\nin the case of Vikram Cement Limited (supra),
\nthe petitioner decided to file an appeal before CESTAT and
\naccordingly, an appeal was filed on 15.05.2007 along with stay
\napplication and application for condonation of delay of 817 days.
\nThe matter came up for hearing before the CESTAT on 30.05.2007 and
\nthe petitioner’s application for condonation of delay was rejected by
\nthe CESTAT on the ground that the petitioner had not filed the appeal
\nwithin the reasonable period.  The CESTAT also held that appeal
\nrelated to short period and does not involve large amount considering
\nthe status of the petitioner.  It is this order which is under
\nchallenge in the present petition.\n<\/p>\n
8.
\n\t\tIn the memo of petition a contention was raised that the order
\npassed by the CESTAT, Commissioner (Appeals) and Joint Commissioner
\nare ex facie perverse, illegal and wholly incorrect in law and
\ntherefore, the same are liable to be set aside.  It is further
\ncontended that the order passed by the CESTAT dismissing the appeal
\non the technical grounds of limitation had resulted in failure of
\njustice inasmuch as by doing so the CESTAT has made the petitioner as
\nvictim of law on account of changing legal position.  Technicalities
\nof law cannot prevent any Court from doing substantial justice.  It
\nis further contended that there was sufficient cause and CESTAT ought
\nto have condoned the delay.  Reliance was also placed on the decision
\nof the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of State of Andhra
\nPradesh Vs. Venkataramana Chuduva & Muraura Merch,
\nreported in (1986) 159 ITR 59, wherein the decision of
\nthe Sales Tax Tribunal was upheld and the Tribunal condoned the delay
\nof more than one year on the ground that the subsequent decision of
\nthe Honourable Supreme Court constituted sufficient cause for not
\nfiling an appeal.  It was, therefore, contended that the subject
\nmatter of the petition is covered in favour of the petitioner by the
\ndecision of the larger Bench of the Honourable Supreme Court in the
\ncase of Vikram Cement Limited (supra).\n<\/p>\n
9.\t\tWe
\nhave perused the order of the Tribunal as well as the contentions
\nraised in present petition.  We are of the view that the Tribunal was
\njustified in rejecting the application for condonation of delay as
\nthe delay is of more than two years.  The petitioner has filed the
\nappeal before the Tribunal only when the Honourable Supreme Court
\nreversed finally its earlier decision and thereafter, for one year no
\naction has been taken by the petitioner.  It was not explained as to
\nwhy the petitioner has taken one year’s time in filing the appeal
\neven after the larger Bench decision of the Honourable Supreme Court
\nin the case of Vikram Cement Limited. While rejecting
\nthe application filed by the petitioner for condonation of delay, the
\nTribunal has considered that the petitioner has accepted the order of
\nthe Commissioner (Appeals) and since the stake involved is very
\nsmall, the application for condonation of delay was rejected. The
\ndecision relied upon by the petitioner in the case decided by the
\nAndhra Pradesh High Court has no relevance as in the present case,
\nthere was no proper explanation of delay of one year after the
\nHonourable Supreme Court’s decision. Even otherwise the amount is
\nvery small as the Appeal is filed against the penalty retained by the
\nCommissioner (Appeal) to the tune of Rs.10,000\/- each in all the
\nthree cases.\n<\/p>\n
10.
\nThus, taking over all view of the matter, we are of the view that the
\nTribunal has taken a just and appropriate decision having considered
\nthe facts and circumstances of the case and there is no infirmity in
\nthe order passed by the Tribunal.  We are, therefore, not inclined to
\nexercise our extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Articles 226\/227
\nof the Constitution of India by entertaining these petitions.  Hence
\nall the three petitions are dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
[K.\n<\/p>\n
A. Puj,  J.]<\/p>\n
[Rajesh
\nH. Shukla, J.]<\/p>\n
kamlesh*<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court M\/S vs Union on 8 September, 2008 Author: K.A.Puj,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice H.Shukla,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/384520\/2008 7\/ 7 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3845 OF 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3846 OF 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3847 OF […]<\/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-48553","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nM\/S vs Union on 8 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S vs Union on 8 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-17T03:27:25+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\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\/S vs Union on 8 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-17T03:27:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1305,\"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\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008\",\"name\":\"M\/S vs Union on 8 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-17T03:27:25+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\/S vs Union on 8 September, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/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":"M\/S vs Union on 8 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S vs Union on 8 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-17T03:27:25+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\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S vs Union on 8 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-17T03:27:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008"},"wordCount":1305,"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\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008","name":"M\/S vs Union on 8 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-17T03:27:25+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-union-on-8-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S vs Union on 8 September, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/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\/48553","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=48553"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48553\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=48553"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=48553"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=48553"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}