{"id":52321,"date":"2011-10-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-10-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011"},"modified":"2017-02-10T01:27:12","modified_gmt":"2017-02-09T19:57:12","slug":"indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011","title":{"rendered":"Indu vs The on 3 October, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Indu vs The on 3 October, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Md Shah,<\/div>\n<pre>  \n Gujarat High Court Case Information System \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\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/526\/2011\t 6\/ 6\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nAPPEAL No. 526 of 2011\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE MD SHAH\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of  Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\tYES\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ? NO\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships  wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? NO\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves  a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ? NO\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated  to the civil judge ? NO\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nINDU\nNISSAN OXO CHEMICALS INDUSTRIES LTD,THRO'MANAGING DIREC -\nAppellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT &amp; 1 - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nMURALI N DEVNANI for\nAppellant(s) : 1, \nMR LR PUJARI, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for\nOpponent(s) : 1, \nRULE SERVED for Opponent(s) : 2, \nMR ASHISH M\nDAGLI for Opponent(s) :\n2, \n=========================================================\n\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 MD SHAH\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 03\/10\/2011 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>1.\tThe<br \/>\nappellant &#8211; original complainant has filed this appeal for<br \/>\nquashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 8.3.2011<br \/>\npassed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara in Criminal<br \/>\nCase No.5060 of 1995.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe<br \/>\nbrief facts giving rise to this appeal are as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>2.1\tThe<br \/>\nApex Petrochemicals Limited &#8211; respondent No.2 &#8211; herein  had<br \/>\npurchased from the complainant appellant herein 81,150 kgs of Iso<br \/>\nOctanol amounting to Rs.50,30,200\/-. Against this the accused company<br \/>\nhad issued seven account payee cheques  in favour of complainant.<br \/>\nHowever the said cheques were dishonoured due to insufficient funds.<br \/>\nThereafter the complainant had issued a legal notice to the accused<br \/>\ncompany on 19.10.1995 regarding the dishonour of the said cheques by<br \/>\nregistered post. The said notice dated 19.10.1995 wad duly served to<br \/>\nthe accused company on 21.10.1995.  However, the accused company has<br \/>\nfailed to pay the amount in question and the accused company has<br \/>\nneither replied to the said notice nor complied with the requirements<br \/>\nof the said notice, and thereby committed an offence punishable<br \/>\nunder Section 138 and 141 of the Indian Negotiable Instruments Act.<br \/>\nThereafter the complainant had filed a complaint before the learned<br \/>\nChief Judicial Magistrate, Baroda  against the accused-company.  The<br \/>\nlearned trial court vide order dated 8.3.2001 has dismissed the said<br \/>\ncomplaint for want of prosecution and thereby acquitted the accused.<br \/>\nHence this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tHeard<br \/>\nlearned advocate Mr.Murli Devnani for the appellant, learned APP<br \/>\nMr.L.R.Pujari for the respondent No.1-State and learned advocate<br \/>\nMr.Ashish Dagli for the respondent No.2.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tIt<br \/>\nis submitted that the present respondent No.2-accused company had<br \/>\npreferred one Criminal Misc. Application No.13055 of 2007 against the<br \/>\nappellant company  before this Court  whereby this Court (Coram: Akil<br \/>\nKureshi, J.) on 1.11.2007 has passed the  the following order.\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;At<br \/>\nthis stage, I am not inclined to interfere with the trial.  Whether<br \/>\nthere was a service of notice on the petitioner on 19.10.1995 or<br \/>\nwhether there was service of the notice for the first time on<br \/>\n21.10.1995 is the matter to be examined during the course of trial.<br \/>\nAt this stage, where the trial is midway, I do not find it proper to<br \/>\ninterfere and hazard a conclusion on the basis of oral evidence,<br \/>\nwhich may have been recorded.  Secondly, the complaint was filed in<br \/>\n1995, the petitioner was served with the process of the Court<br \/>\nproceeding many years back.  He also participated in the trial.  On<br \/>\nthese grounds, I do not see any scope for quashing the pending<br \/>\ncomplaint.\n<\/p>\n<p>However,<br \/>\nif the petitioner is correct in his assertion that the complainant is<br \/>\ndelaying the proceedings, it is expected that the learned Magistrate<br \/>\nshall take suitable steps to prevent hardship to the petitioner and<br \/>\nmiscarriage of justice and shall endeavour to complete the trial<br \/>\npreferably within four months from the receipt of a copy of this<br \/>\norder subject to the cooperation by the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>With<br \/>\nthese observations, the petition is dismissed.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tIn<br \/>\nspite of the above-referred order passed by this Court (Coram: Akil<br \/>\nKureshi, J.), the trial court has not commenced the trial though the<br \/>\nchief-examination of the complainant and the evidence was tendered<br \/>\nway back in the year 2005, and thereupon as per the Rojkam, number of<br \/>\ntimes the matter was adjourned for one or other reason. Thereafter<br \/>\nthe trial court has adjourned the matter on 23.12.2010  for recording<br \/>\nof the evidence, but as the trial court was busy with other work and<br \/>\nthe court time was over, the matter was adjourned to 17.1.2011.<br \/>\nThereafter on 17.1.2011 the complainant and the respective parties<br \/>\nare present but as the trial court was busy with another matter, the<br \/>\nmatter could not proceed further and the matter was adjourned to<br \/>\n8.3.2011.  Thereafter on 8.3.2011 the complainant or his learned<br \/>\nadvocate could not remain present and as the matter is very old, the<br \/>\ncomplaint was dismissed by the trial court which shows that the<br \/>\ncomplainant was not present on 17.1.2011.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.<br \/>\n\tReliance is placed on a decision of  this Court (Coram: S.K.Keshote,<br \/>\nJ.) in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/348433\/\">Ratanlal Gulabchand Gupta vs. Sahara Gruh Udyog<br \/>\nBhandar and others<\/a> decided in Special Criminal Application No.527<br \/>\nof 1999 decided on 20.2.2001, more  particularly head-note (A)  which<br \/>\nreads under:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Criminal<br \/>\nProcedure Code, 1973 (II of 1974) &#8211; Sec.256 &#8211; Negotiable<br \/>\nInstruments Act, 1881 (XXVI of 1881) &#8211; Sec.138 &#8211;<br \/>\nComplaint for offence under Sec.138 dismissed on the ground of<br \/>\nabsence of complainant even though Advocate had been engaged &#8211;<br \/>\nComplainant should not be penalised for negligence of Advocate &#8211;<br \/>\nIn a case of this nature, presence of complainant would not be<br \/>\nnecessary on every date &#8211; Matter restored.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>7.<br \/>\nIt is submitted by learned advocate Mr.Dagli  for the respondent<br \/>\nNo.2-accused  that the trial court has granted exemption to the<br \/>\naccused from remaining  present as undertaking was given by the<br \/>\naccused before the trial court that in his absence if the case is<br \/>\nconducted,  he has no objection. It is also submitted by learned<br \/>\nadvocate Mr.Dagli that as and when required,  the accused will remain<br \/>\npresent before the trial court.  It is submitted by learned advocates<br \/>\nfor both the parties that the complainant as well as the accused will<br \/>\nremain present before the trial court and will also give full<br \/>\ncooperation for  conducting the matter and they will not ask any<br \/>\nunnecessary adjournments.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.<br \/>\nThis Court has gone through the averments made in this  appeal as<br \/>\nwell as Rojkam of the case and the impugned order passed by the trial<br \/>\ncourt. \tConsidering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case<br \/>\nand in view of the decision relied on by the learned advocate for the<br \/>\nappellant in the case of Ratanlal Gulabchand Gupta (supra), the<br \/>\ncomplainant should not be penalised for negligence of advocate. In<br \/>\nview of the above, in the opinion of this Court, if some suitable<br \/>\ncost will be imposed to the complainant, the same will meet with the<br \/>\nends of justice.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tIn<br \/>\nview of the above, the appeal is allowed.  The impugned order dated<br \/>\n8.3.2011 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara in<br \/>\nCriminal Case No.5060 of 1995 is hereby quashed and set aside.  The<br \/>\nappellant is directed to  pay  cost Rs.5,000\/-  to the respondent<br \/>\nNo.2-accused.  The trial court is directed to give priority and<br \/>\nconduct the matter by keeping on day to day basis as the matter is of<br \/>\nthe year 1994, and decide the same in accordance with law.<br \/>\nRegistry is directed to send back Record &amp; Proceedings to the<br \/>\ntrial court forthwith.\n<\/p>\n<p>(<br \/>\nM.D. SHAH, J. )<\/p>\n<p>syed\/<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Indu vs The on 3 October, 2011 Author: Md Shah, Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/526\/2011 6\/ 6 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 526 of 2011 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be [&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":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-52321","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Indu vs The on 3 October, 2011 - 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\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Indu vs The on 3 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-10-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-02-09T19:57:12+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\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Indu vs The on 3 October, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-10-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-09T19:57:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1071,\"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\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011\",\"name\":\"Indu vs The on 3 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-10-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-09T19:57:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Indu vs The on 3 October, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"Indu vs The on 3 October, 2011 - 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\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Indu vs The on 3 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-10-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-02-09T19:57:12+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\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Indu vs The on 3 October, 2011","datePublished":"2011-10-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-09T19:57:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011"},"wordCount":1071,"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\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011","name":"Indu vs The on 3 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-10-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-09T19:57:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/indu-vs-the-on-3-october-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Indu vs The on 3 October, 2011"}]},{"@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\/52321","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=52321"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52321\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=52321"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=52321"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=52321"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}