{"id":49407,"date":"2009-10-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009"},"modified":"2016-03-18T14:47:41","modified_gmt":"2016-03-18T09:17:41","slug":"the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"The Deputy Commissioner vs Vatehalli Estate on 7 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
The Deputy Commissioner vs Vatehalli Estate on 7 October, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: P.D.Dinakaran(Cj) & Shantanagoudar<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA. AT BANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE 0\"!\" DAY OF OCTOBER 2009\nPRESENT\nTHE I-IOIWBLE MR. P.D. DINAKARAN, CHIEF JUSTICE\nAND\nTHE I-ION'BLE MRJUSTICE MOHAN SI-IANTANAGOUDAR\nWRIT APPEAL NO. 1626 of 2009(GM~FOR)\nBETWEEN:\n1 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER\n\nHASSAN DISTRICT,\nHAS SAN.\n\n2 THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST\nHASSAN DISTRICT,\nHASSAN.\n\n3 THE STATE OF KARNATAKA\nREPT D. BY ITS SECRETARY,\nDEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,\nM.S.BUILDING,\nVIDHANA VEEDHI, BANGALORE 1.\nBANGALORE\n\n APPELLANT S\n(By Sri BASAVARAJ KARREDDY, GOVT. ADVOCATE)\nAND :\nVATEHALH ESTATE\n\nBY ITS CHARIMAN,\nZIAULLA SHERIFF A\/A 64 YEARS,\n\n \n\n\n\nS \/O LATE ABDUL GAFFAR SHERIFF\n\nR\/O HOSUR ESTATES LIMITED,\nSAKALESHPUR TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT,\nREP. BY THE GPA HOLDER\n\nA.C. RAMACHANDRA,\n\nAGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,\n\nS \/O SRI NARAYAN,\n\nREF. OF M\/S. KENARA WOOD 85 PLYWOOD\nINDUSTRIES LTD.,\n\nR\/O SAKLESHPUR,\n\nHASSAN DISTRICT.\n\n RESPONDENT<\/pre>\n
{By Sri LSUBRAMANYA, ADVOCATE FOR M \/8. AH LAW FIRM
\nFOR RESPDT)<\/p>\n
WRIT APPEAL FILED U\/ S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH
\nCOURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN
\nTHE WRIT PETITION NO.3902\/2008 DATED 24\/O3\/2008; AND
\nETC.\n<\/p>\n
THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING UP FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
\nTHE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:–\n<\/p>\n
J U D G M E N ‘1’<\/p>\n
(Deiivered by P.D.Dinakarar1, C.J.)<\/p>\n
This appeal is \ufb01led by the State–respondentS in
\nW.P.NO.3902 \/ 2008 being aggrieved by the Order dated 24.03.2009
\nwherein the learned Single Judge has aiiowed the Writ petition<\/p>\n
and remitted the matter to the reSporIdentS–appe11antS herein for<\/p>\n
fresh consideration of the application of the petitioners in<\/p>\n
accordance with law.\n<\/p>\n
2. The respondents herein \ufb01led W.P.No.3902\/2008 being
\naggrieved by the endorsement issued by the respondents in the
\nwrit petition wherein the application filed for permission to fell
\ntrees as sought for by the writ petitioners was rejected by the
\nimpugned endorsement dated 24.01.2008. It is contended in the
\nwrit petition that petitioners are entitled to cut the trees by seeking<\/p>\n
permission from the respondents in the writ petition and<\/p>\n
permission ought to have been granted and the application for
\npermission to fellthe trees has been wrongly rejected by holding
\nthat no permission can be granted to fell the trees situate in the
\nprivate lands as the trees were not leased in favour of the
\npetitioners.\n<\/p>\n
3. The learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition
\nfollowing the directions in other cases, remitted the matter to the
\nrespondents for fresh consideration of the application of the
\npetitioners in accordance with law. Being aggrieved by the said<\/p>\n
order of the learned Single Judge dated 24.03.2008 respondents in<\/p>\n
the writ petition have preferred this appeal. There is delay of 380
\ndays in \ufb01ling the appeal and application has been \ufb01led for<\/p>\n
condoning the said delay in \ufb01ling the appeal.\n<\/p>\n
4. We have heard the learned Government Advocate<\/p>\n
appearing for the appellants.\n<\/p>\n
5. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the
\nappellants submitted that the delay has been satisfactorily
\nexplained and the learned Single Judge was not justified in setting<\/p>\n
aside the order and endorsement issued by the appellants refusing<\/p>\n
permission to fell the trees situate in the land belonging to the writ
\npetitioners~respondents herein without considering the contentions
\nraised by the appellants in the writ petition and therefore, the<\/p>\n
order passed by the learned Single Judge is liable to be set aside.\n<\/p>\n
6. We have considered the contentions of the learned<\/p>\n
Government Advocate and scrutinised the material on record.\n<\/p>\n
7. The material on record would clearly show that the
\napplication filed by the writ petitioners-respondents herein seeking<\/p>\n
for permission to fell the trees situate in their land has been<\/p>\n
rejected by the appellants herein. It is the contention of the writ
\npetitioners that petitioners are entitled to cut the trees grown in
\ntheir land by seeking permission to fell the same from the
\nappellants, whereas it is contended by respondents–appellar1ts
\nherein that what was conveyed was the land and ownership of
\ntrees were not conveyed to the writ petitioners and therefore,
\nquestion of granting permission to fell the trees belonging to the
\nGovernment would not arise and that writ petitioners who are
\nowners of the land have no right over the trees which were<\/p>\n
standing at the time of ganting the lease. The learned Single<\/p>\n
Judge has followed the earlier decisions and has set aside the
\nimpugned order and endorsement and remitted the matter to the<\/p>\n
appellants for fresh disposal of the application.\n<\/p>\n
_8. It is clear from the perusal of the order passed in
\nW.P.No.3932\/2008 disposed of on 15.02.2008 that the order
\npassed in the said writ petition has become final and in the said
\nwrit petition identical question arose for consideration regarding
\ngranting of permission to fell the trees in the land belonging to the
\nwrit petitioners and in the said decision, following the earlier<\/p>\n
decision of this Court in W.P.No.4-3903\/1995; and connected<\/p>\n
matters disposed of on 19.7.1996 (M.L.KRlSHNE GOWDA 82.
\nANOTHER vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND ANOTHER) while
\nconsidering the similar matter detail guidelines have been laid
\ndown for consideration of the application for seeking permission to
\nfell the trees situate in the land belonging to the writ petitioners
\nand following the said decision in W.P.No.43003\/ 1995 the matter
\nwas remitted to the respondents in the writ petition for fresh
\ndisposal in accordance with law in the light of the observations
\nmade in the order. In View of the fact that the order passed in the
\nsaid W.P.No.3932\/2007 dated 15.2.2008 has become \ufb01nal and
\ndetail guidelines have been laid down by this court in
\nW.P.No.43003\/1995 disposed of on 19.7.1996 hence, it is clear
\nthat the application is now required to be considered by the
\nappellants in accordance with the directions issued in
\nW.P.No.3932\/2007 disposed of on 15.2.2008. The learned Single
\nJudge has not decided the contentions of the parties on merits and
\nall contentions are kept open to be urged before the Authority and
\naccordingly, we hold that the order passed by the learned Single
\nJudge is justi\ufb01ed and does not suffer from any error or illegality as<\/p>\n
to call for interference in this intra court appeal.\n<\/p>\n
9. There is delay of 380 days in \ufb01ling the appeal and on
\nperusal of the affidavit \ufb01led in support of the application, it is clear
\nthat the averrnents made in the application would only explain as
\nto how the delay has occurred in \ufb01ling the appeal and no cause
\nmuch less sufficient cause is made out for condoning the
\ninordinate delay of 380 days. Accordingly, we hold that there is no
\nmerit in this application \ufb01led for condoning the delay in \ufb01ling the<\/p>\n
appeal and pass the following order:\n<\/p>\n
The writ appeal is dismissed on the ground of delay and also<\/p>\n
on merits.\n<\/p>\n
sa\/-\n<\/p>\n
Chief lus’\u00a31G@
\nSd\/-\n<\/p>\n
JUDGE
\nSnb\/ _<\/p>\n
Index: Yes\/No ‘
\nWeb Host: Yes \/ No<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court The Deputy Commissioner vs Vatehalli Estate on 7 October, 2009 Author: P.D.Dinakaran(Cj) & Shantanagoudar IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA. AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 0″!” DAY OF OCTOBER 2009 PRESENT THE I-IOIWBLE MR. P.D. DINAKARAN, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE I-ION’BLE MRJUSTICE MOHAN SI-IANTANAGOUDAR WRIT APPEAL NO. 1626 of 2009(GM~FOR) BETWEEN: 1 […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-49407","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Deputy Commissioner vs Vatehalli Estate on 7 October, 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\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Deputy Commissioner vs Vatehalli Estate on 7 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-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=\"2009-10-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-03-18T09:17:41+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=\"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\\\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Deputy Commissioner vs Vatehalli Estate on 7 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-03-18T09:17:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1006,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009\",\"name\":\"The Deputy Commissioner vs Vatehalli Estate on 7 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-03-18T09:17:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Deputy Commissioner vs Vatehalli Estate on 7 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:\\\/\\\/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":"The Deputy Commissioner vs Vatehalli Estate on 7 October, 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\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Deputy Commissioner vs Vatehalli Estate on 7 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-03-18T09:17:41+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Deputy Commissioner vs Vatehalli Estate on 7 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-03-18T09:17:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009"},"wordCount":1006,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009","name":"The Deputy Commissioner vs Vatehalli Estate on 7 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-03-18T09:17:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-deputy-commissioner-vs-vatehalli-estate-on-7-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Deputy Commissioner vs Vatehalli Estate on 7 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:\/\/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\/49407","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=49407"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49407\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=49407"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=49407"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=49407"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}