{"id":48902,"date":"2009-12-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-12-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009"},"modified":"2016-05-14T05:07:06","modified_gmt":"2016-05-13T23:37:06","slug":"thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009","title":{"rendered":"Thiyyakandi Ramachandran vs Sheena on 2 December, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Thiyyakandi Ramachandran vs Sheena on 2 December, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRPFC.No. 50 of 2009()\n\n\n1. THIYYAKANDI RAMACHANDRAN,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. SHEENA, D\/O.LATE PARAMBATH BALAN,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. RISHEK, AGED 16 YEARS,MINOR.\n\n3. ANEESH, AGED 14 YEARS,MINOR.\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN\n\n                For Respondent  :SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice P.S.GOPINATHAN\n\n Dated :02\/12\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                    P.S.GOPINATHAN, J.\n\n                 = = = = = = = = = = = =\n                   R.P.(FC).No.50 of 2009.\n                 = = = = = = = = = = = =\n\n         Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2009.\n\n                        O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
     The Family Court, Kozhikode in MC.No.45\/2007 by<\/p>\n
order dated 6.5.2008, directed the revision petitioner to pay<\/p>\n
monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.750\/- each to<\/p>\n
respondents 1 and 2, and at the rate of Rs.500\/- to the 3rd<\/p>\n
respondent under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal<\/p>\n
Procedure. Assailing the legality, correctness and propriety<\/p>\n
of that Order, this Revision Petition was filed.<\/p>\n
     2.   It is admitted that the first respondent is the<\/p>\n
divorced   wife   of  the    revision  petitioner  and   that<\/p>\n
respondents 2 and 3 are the children of the revision<\/p>\n
petitioner born in the wedlock with the first respondent. It<\/p>\n
is also admitted that now the relationship between the<\/p>\n
revision petitioner and the first respondent was dissolved by<\/p>\n
the order on a joint petition before the Family Court. Thus,<\/p>\n
R.P.(FC).No.50 of 2009.\n<\/p>\n
\n                             -: 2 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
the first respondent is the divorced wife.       One of the<\/p>\n
contentions that was urged by the revision petitioner is that<\/p>\n
at the time of filing of the joint petition under Sec.13-B of<\/p>\n
the Hindu Marriage Act for divorce, the first respondent<\/p>\n
had given up her claim for maintenance. Neither the order<\/p>\n
of the Family Court granting divorce, nor any document was<\/p>\n
produced to show that the first respondent had at any time<\/p>\n
given up the claim for maintenance. It is crucial to note<\/p>\n
that the revision petitioner had not advanced any contention<\/p>\n
before the trial court or any evidence was let in to that<\/p>\n
effect. Since such contention was not taken before the trial<\/p>\n
court, it is not at all entertainable for the first time in<\/p>\n
revision. Adding to that there is no material to conclude<\/p>\n
that the first respondent had at any time given up the claim<\/p>\n
for maintenance. The liability to provide maintenance to<\/p>\n
respondents 2 and 3 is not challenged.\n<\/p>\n
      3.    The learned counsel for the revision petitioner<\/p>\n
submitted that expanding the term ‘wife’ mentioned in<\/p>\n
R.P.(FC).No.50 of 2009.\n<\/p>\n
\n                                -: 3 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
Sec.125 Crl.P.C. by including divorced wife through an<\/p>\n
explanation is against the object of the legislation. It was<\/p>\n
further argued that the term `wife’ mentioned in Sec.125<\/p>\n
refers only to wife and no other category can be brought<\/p>\n
into. In support of his argument the learned counsel had<\/p>\n
relied upon the decision reported in Savitaben Somabhai<\/p>\n
Bhatiya v. State of Gujarat<\/a> [2005(2) KLT 65 (SC)]. At<\/p>\n
para.18 it is stated that:\n<\/p>\n
            “[t]he     legislative  intent   being clearly
\n            reflected in S.125 of the Code, there is no
\n            scope for enlarging its scope by introducing
\n            any artificial definition to include woman not
\n            lawfully married in the expression ‘wife’.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
That is a case relating to the claim by a woman who was<\/p>\n
alleged to have been married by a man with a living wife in<\/p>\n
an earlier marriage. It is in the above factual background<\/p>\n
the Apex Court observed that wife does not include a<\/p>\n
woman who is not lawfully married and that the scope of<\/p>\n
Sec.125 Crl.P.C. can’t be enlarged by introducing artificial<\/p>\n
definition to include woman not lawfully married in the<\/p>\n
R.P.(FC).No.50 of 2009.\n<\/p>\n
\n                             -: 4 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
expression ‘wife’. Facts of this case has no similarity with<\/p>\n
the facts of the reported case. The ruling in that case can<\/p>\n
no way be applied to the case on hand.\n<\/p>\n
      4.    Going by Sec.125 of the Code of Criminal<\/p>\n
Procedure and the Explanation there to, I find that<\/p>\n
explanation to Sec.125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,<\/p>\n
in fact, does not include any other category of person to the<\/p>\n
term wife.       It only explain that the wife mentioned in<\/p>\n
Sec.125 would also include a woman who has been divorced<\/p>\n
or had obtained divorce and has not remarried.        It only<\/p>\n
extends the liability of the husband to maintain his divorced<\/p>\n
wife till she gets remarried and no other category of<\/p>\n
woman, who is otherwise married or any concubine.<\/p>\n
      5.    The contention that was advanced has been<\/p>\n
rejected by this Court in Valsala v. Surendran (1979(KLT<\/p>\n
160), Sadasivan Pillai v. Vijayalakshmi<\/a> (1987(1) KLT<\/p>\n
381) and Balan v. Visalakshy (1985 KLT 967). In Balan’s<\/p>\n
case it was also held that the status is not dependent upon<\/p>\n
R.P.(FC).No.50 of 2009.\n<\/p>\n
\n                              -: 5 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
the mode of divorce.\n<\/p>\n
      6.    Such being the status of the parties and the<\/p>\n
rights, I find little reason to accept the argument advanced<\/p>\n
by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner. The first<\/p>\n
respondent being a divorced wife she would come within<\/p>\n
the ambit of Explanation (b) to Sec.125 of the Code of<\/p>\n
Criminal Procedure and is entitled to get maintenance.<\/p>\n
      7.    Though the revision petitioner had got a case that<\/p>\n
the first respondent had properties and she is getting<\/p>\n
income, there is no material to come to the conclusion that<\/p>\n
the respondents are having any source of income.          The<\/p>\n
revision petitioner cannot escape from the liability to<\/p>\n
maintain the respondents. Respondents 2 and 3 were aged<\/p>\n
14 and 12 respectively as on the date of the petition.<\/p>\n
Taking into account the value of the essential commodities<\/p>\n
and the need of the respondents, the quantum of<\/p>\n
maintenance awarded by the trial court is not at all<\/p>\n
excessive.     In fact, it is on a lower side.  The revision<\/p>\n
R.P.(FC).No.50 of 2009.\n<\/p>\n
\n                              -: 6 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
petitioner has got a contention that he is an Electrician,<\/p>\n
getting income of Rs.125\/- only per day. That argument is<\/p>\n
devoid of any merit. Now-a-days, even coolies are getting<\/p>\n
higher wages. The revision petitioner can find out means<\/p>\n
for providing minimum requirement to the respondents.<\/p>\n
The amount awarded by the trial court is not beyond the<\/p>\n
means of the revision petitioner.           No interference is<\/p>\n
warranted in the impugned order.\n<\/p>\n
      In the result, this revision petition is dismissed.<\/p>\n
                                 P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
\nKvs\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Thiyyakandi Ramachandran vs Sheena on 2 December, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RPFC.No. 50 of 2009() 1. THIYYAKANDI RAMACHANDRAN, … Petitioner Vs 1. SHEENA, D\/O.LATE PARAMBATH BALAN, … Respondent 2. RISHEK, AGED 16 YEARS,MINOR. 3. ANEESH, AGED 14 YEARS,MINOR. For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN For Respondent :SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN The Hon’ble […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-48902","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThiyyakandi Ramachandran vs Sheena on 2 December, 2009 - 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\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Thiyyakandi Ramachandran vs Sheena on 2 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-12-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-13T23:37:06+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\\\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Thiyyakandi Ramachandran vs Sheena on 2 December, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-13T23:37:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009\"},\"wordCount\":948,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009\",\"name\":\"Thiyyakandi Ramachandran vs Sheena on 2 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-13T23:37:06+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Thiyyakandi Ramachandran vs Sheena on 2 December, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Thiyyakandi Ramachandran vs Sheena on 2 December, 2009 - 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\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Thiyyakandi Ramachandran vs Sheena on 2 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-12-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-13T23:37:06+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\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Thiyyakandi Ramachandran vs Sheena on 2 December, 2009","datePublished":"2009-12-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-13T23:37:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009"},"wordCount":948,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009","name":"Thiyyakandi Ramachandran vs Sheena on 2 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-12-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-13T23:37:06+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thiyyakandi-ramachandran-vs-sheena-on-2-december-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Thiyyakandi Ramachandran vs Sheena on 2 December, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48902","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=48902"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48902\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=48902"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=48902"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=48902"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}