{"id":51175,"date":"2007-03-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-03-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007"},"modified":"2017-02-05T12:06:44","modified_gmt":"2017-02-05T06:36:44","slug":"p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007","title":{"rendered":"P. Madhavan vs Periyakaruppan on 13 March, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">P. Madhavan vs Periyakaruppan on 13 March, 2007<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED : 13\/03\/2007\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.RAJESWARAN\n\nC.R.P.NPD.(MD).No.966 of 2006\nand\nM.P.(MD).No.1 of 2006\n\n1. P. Madhavan\t\t\t... Petitioner\n2. Indira\n\t\t\t \t\nVs.\n\n1. Periyakaruppan\n2. Ponnammal\t\t\t...  Respondents\n\t\n\nPrayer\n\n\nPetition filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure against the\norder dated 13.04.2006  made in E.A.No.15 of 2003 in E.P.No.11 of 2002 in\nO.S.No.164 of 1996 on the file of the District Munsif, Tiruppathur.\n\n\n\n!For Petitioner\t\t... Mr. C. Sundaravadivel\n\n^For Respondents\t... Mr. V. Kannan\n\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tThe petitioner in E.A.No.15 of 2003 in E.P.No.11 of 2002 in O.S.No.164 of<br \/>\n1996 are the Revision petitioners before this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. O.S.No.164 of 1996 was filed by the second respondent herein against<br \/>\nher husband, the husband first respondent herein for maintenance and charge over<br \/>\nthe suit schedule properties.  O.S.No.164 of 1996 was decreed on 29.01.1999<br \/>\ndirecting her (first respondent) husband herein to pay a sum of Rs.750\/- every<br \/>\nmonth and a charge was created over the &#8216;A&#8217; schedule property alone.  The decree<br \/>\nholder wife, filed E.P.No.11 of 2002 for the sale of &#8216;A&#8217;and &#8216;B&#8217; schedule<br \/>\nproperties.  Revision petitioners herein filed a claim petition under Order 21<br \/>\nRule 58 in execution Petition No.11 0f 2002 praying to declare that they are<br \/>\neach entitled to 1\/3 share in the &#8216;A&#8217; schedule property and therefore to<br \/>\ndischarge 2\/3 share in the &#8216;A&#8217; schedule property and to discharge the entire &#8216;B&#8217;<br \/>\nSchedule property from the execution proceedings.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. The case of Revision petitioners is that they are the children of the<br \/>\nfirst respondent born to his second wife and as such they have a share in the<br \/>\n&#8216;A&#8217; schedule property which is a heridictory property even according to the<br \/>\nsecond respondent wife herein as admitted by her in the plaint in O.S.No.164 of<br \/>\n1996.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. The execution Court after going through the decree made in O.S.No.164<br \/>\nof 1996, found that charge was created only with regard to &#8216;A&#8217; schedule property<br \/>\nand there was no decree for the &#8216;B&#8217; schedule property held that the entire &#8216;B&#8217;<br \/>\nschedule property is to be discharged from the execution proceedings.  In so far<br \/>\nas the &#8216;A&#8217; schedule properties are concerned, the execution Court directed the<br \/>\nRevision petitioners to file a separate suit in respect of their claim and<br \/>\nthereby dismissed their claim in respect of &#8216;A&#8217; schedule property.  Aggrieved<br \/>\nagainst the said order, the above Civil Revision Petition has been filed under<br \/>\nSection 115 of the Civil Procedure Code.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5.  Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel<br \/>\nfor the 2nd respondent.  I have also gone through the documents and the<br \/>\nJudgements referred to by them in support of their submissions.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. The learned counsel for the second respondent raised preliminary<br \/>\nobjection as to the maintainability of the Civil Revision Petition under Section<br \/>\n115 of Civil Procedure Code by contending that the adjudication of the execution<br \/>\nCourt under Order 21 Rule 58(2) and (3) of C.P.C, is deemed to be a decree under<br \/>\nSub-Section 4 of Rule 58 of Order 21 and as such only an appeal will be against<br \/>\nthe order of the execution Court dated 13.04.2006.  He relied on the decision of<br \/>\nthis Court reported in 2004(2)M.L.J.105 (Minor Sathish Babu represented by his<br \/>\nfather and natural guardian, P.Nagarajan Vs. Mohan and another).\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. To decide the question of maintainability of the Revision Petition, it<br \/>\nis useful to refer to Order 21 Rule 58 of C.P.C.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t58. Adjudication of claims to, or objections to attachment of property.<br \/>\n(1) Where any claim is preferred to, or any objection is made to the attachment<br \/>\nof, any property attached in execution of a decree on the ground that such<br \/>\nproperty is not liable to such attachment, the Court shall proceed to adjudicate<br \/>\nupon the claim or objection in accordance with the provisions therein contained:<br \/>\n\tProvided that no such claim or objection shall be entertained-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(a) where, before the claim is preferred or objection is made, the<br \/>\nproperty attached has already been sold; or\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(b) where the Court considers that the claim or objection was designedly<br \/>\nor unnecessarily delayed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(2) All questions (including questions relating to right, title or<br \/>\ninterest in the property attached) arising between the parties to a proceeding<br \/>\nor their representatives under this rule and relevant to the adjudication of the<br \/>\nclaim or objection, shall be determined by the Court dealing with the claim or<br \/>\nobjection and not by a separate suit.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(3) Upon the determination of the questions referred to in sub-rule (2),<br \/>\nthe Court shall, in accordance with such determination, &#8211;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(a) allow the claim or objection and release the property from attachment<br \/>\neither wholly or to such extent as it thinks, fir; or\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(b) disallow the claim or objection; or\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(c) continue the attachment subject to any mortgage, charge or other<br \/>\ninterest in favour of any person; or\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(d) pass such order as in the circumstance of the case it deems fit.<br \/>\n\t(4) Where any claim or objection has been adjudicated upon under this<br \/>\nrule, the order made thereon shall have the same force and be subject to the<br \/>\nsame conditions as to appeal or otherwise as if it were a decree.<br \/>\n\t(5) Where a claim or an objection is preferred and the Court, under the<br \/>\nproviso to sub-rule(1), refuses to entertain it, the party against whom wuch<br \/>\norder is made may institute a suit to establish the right which he claims to the<br \/>\nproperty in dispute; but, subject to the result of such suit, if any, an order<br \/>\nso refusing to entertain the claim or objection shall be conclusive.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;58.A. Order of attachment to be communicated to the Registering Officer:-<br \/>\n\tAny order of attachment passed under Rule 54 of this Order raising the<br \/>\nattachment by removal, determination or release passed under Rules 55, 57 or 58<br \/>\nof this Order, shall be communicated to the Registering Officer within the local<br \/>\nlimits of whose jurisdiction the whole or any part of the immovable property<br \/>\ncomprised in such order is situate.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11. A plain reading of the above would make it very clear that the<br \/>\nadjudication of the execution Court in a claim petition filed under Order 21<br \/>\nRule 58 is deemed to be a decree and therefore only an appeal will lie against<br \/>\nan order of adjudication.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12. This Court in 2004(2) M.L.J.105 (cited supra) held that on a careful<br \/>\nanalysis of the relevant provisions of the definition of a decree in Section<br \/>\n2(2)(a) C.P.C., S.104(1)(i) R\/W Order 21 Rule 58(4) C.P.C, no regular appeal is<br \/>\ncontemplated as provided u\/s 96 of C.P.C.  But a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal<br \/>\nalone is contemplated.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t13.  Hence I am necessarily to hold that the above revision petition filed<br \/>\nu\/s 115  of C.P.C is not at all maintainable and the proper remedy for the<br \/>\nRevision petitioners is,to file a C.M.A before the appropriate Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t14. In the result, the Civil Revision petition is dismissed as not<br \/>\nmaintainable.  No Costs.  Connected C.M.P. is also dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>The District Munsif Court<br \/>\nTiruppathur.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court P. Madhavan vs Periyakaruppan on 13 March, 2007 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 13\/03\/2007 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.RAJESWARAN C.R.P.NPD.(MD).No.966 of 2006 and M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2006 1. P. Madhavan &#8230; Petitioner 2. Indira Vs. 1. Periyakaruppan 2. Ponnammal &#8230; Respondents Prayer Petition filed under Section 115 of [&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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-51175","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>P. Madhavan vs Periyakaruppan on 13 March, 2007 - 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\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"P. Madhavan vs Periyakaruppan on 13 March, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-03-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-02-05T06:36:44+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\\\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"P. Madhavan vs Periyakaruppan on 13 March, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-03-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-05T06:36:44+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1079,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007\",\"name\":\"P. Madhavan vs Periyakaruppan on 13 March, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-03-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-05T06:36:44+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"P. Madhavan vs Periyakaruppan on 13 March, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"P. Madhavan vs Periyakaruppan on 13 March, 2007 - 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\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"P. Madhavan vs Periyakaruppan on 13 March, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-03-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-02-05T06:36:44+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\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"P. Madhavan vs Periyakaruppan on 13 March, 2007","datePublished":"2007-03-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-05T06:36:44+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007"},"wordCount":1079,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007","name":"P. Madhavan vs Periyakaruppan on 13 March, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-03-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-05T06:36:44+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-madhavan-vs-periyakaruppan-on-13-march-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"P. Madhavan vs Periyakaruppan on 13 March, 2007"}]},{"@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\/51175","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=51175"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51175\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=51175"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=51175"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=51175"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}