{"id":5250,"date":"2008-08-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008"},"modified":"2016-05-07T12:35:42","modified_gmt":"2016-05-07T07:05:42","slug":"general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"General vs Spl.Laq on 4 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">General vs Spl.Laq on 4 August, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Ks Jhaveri,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nFA\/1298\/2000\t 6\/ 6\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nFIRST\nAPPEAL No. 1298 of 2000\n \n\nTo\n\n\n \n\nFIRST\nAPPEAL No. 1302 of 2000\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n<\/pre>\n<p>GENERAL<br \/>\nMANAGER &#8211; Appellant(s)<\/p>\n<p>Versus<\/p>\n<p>SPL.LAQ<br \/>\nOFFICER &amp; 1 &#8211; Defendant(s)<\/p>\n<p>=========================================================<\/p>\n<p>Appearance<br \/>\n:\n<\/p>\n<p>MR<br \/>\nRAJNI H MEHTA for<br \/>\nAppellant(s) : 1,<br \/>\nNOTICE SERVED for Defendant(s) : 1 &#8211;\n<\/p>\n<p>2.<br \/>\n=========================================================<\/p>\n<p>CORAM<br \/>\n\t\t\t:\n<\/p>\n<p>HONOURABLE<br \/>\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI<\/p>\n<p>Date : 04\/08\/2008 <\/p>\n<p>ORAL<br \/>\nCOMMON ORDER <\/p>\n<p>1.\t\tThese<br \/>\nappeals at the instance of Oil and Natural Gas Corporation, the<br \/>\nAcquiring Body, under section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act read<br \/>\nwith section 96 of Civil Procedure Code are against the judgment and<br \/>\naward dated 15th July, 1999 passed by learned assistant<br \/>\nJudge, Mehsana in Land Acquisition Reference No.1347 of 1993.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\t\tThe<br \/>\nState had acquired certain land on temporary basis of  the original<br \/>\nclaimants under section 35 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. After<br \/>\nfollowing procedure the Land Acquisition Officer vide his order dated<br \/>\n06.04.1992 awarded  compensation at the rate of Rs.80\/- per Are per<br \/>\nyear. Feeling aggrieved by the said decision the claimants filed<br \/>\nreferences before the learned Assistant Judge, Mehsana claiming<br \/>\nadditional rental compensation at the rate of Rs.700\/- per Are and<br \/>\nfurther crop compensation. The learned Assistant Judge awarded<br \/>\nadditional compensation at the rate of Rs.190\/- per Are per year and<br \/>\nfurther awarded 20% additional crop compensation. It is against the<br \/>\nsaid awards the present appeals have been filed.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\t\tLearned<br \/>\nAdvocate for the appellant submitted that the issue involved in these<br \/>\nappeals is squarely covered by the ratio laid down in the case of Oil<br \/>\n&amp; Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. Vs. Sankarji Hemaji &amp; Anr<br \/>\nreported in [2008] 17 GHJ (523). The operative part of the said<br \/>\nJudgment reads as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>?S41.\tSimilarly,<br \/>\nevent he conduct and the action of the then Special Land Acquisition<br \/>\nOfficer, who has referred the references applications in more than<br \/>\n100 cases to the reference court, though the applications for<br \/>\nreference were filed after a period of more than 20 years, is also<br \/>\nrequired to be considered seriously at the hands of Government. Under<br \/>\nthe circumstances, Chief Secretary, Revenue Department is directed to<br \/>\nhold necessary inquiry against the concerned Special Land Acquisition<br \/>\nOfficer with regard to his conduct and actions. Registry is directed<br \/>\nto communicate this order to the Chief Secretary, Revenue Department,<br \/>\nState of Gujarat for compliance.\n<\/p>\n<p>42.\tFor<br \/>\nthe reasons stated hereinabove,all the appeals succeed and are<br \/>\nallowed with costs which is quantified at Rs.5000\/- (Rupees Five<br \/>\nThousand only) per each appeal. The impugned common judgment and<br \/>\naward dated 15.10.2005 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil<br \/>\nJudge, Mehsana (Mr. J.R. Shah) inland Reference Case Nos.3780 to 3784<br \/>\nof 2003 is hereby quashed and set aside and it is held that:\n<\/p>\n<p>[i]\tThe<br \/>\nreference applications submitted by the original claimants were not<br \/>\nmaintainable.\n<\/p>\n<p>[ii]\tThe<br \/>\nreference applications were required to be dismissed on the ground of<br \/>\nlimitation considering Article 137 of the Limitation Act.In the<br \/>\nalternate, the same were required to be dismissed on the ground of<br \/>\ndelay and laches.\n<\/p>\n<p>[iii]\tThe<br \/>\nreference court has no jurisdiction to decide any other question<br \/>\nexcept the difference as to sufficiency of compensation in a<br \/>\nreference under sec.35(3) of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>[iv]\tThe<br \/>\nreference court has no jurisdiction to decide any other question<br \/>\nexcept the difference as to sufficiency of compensation in a<br \/>\nreference under section 35(3) of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>[v]\tThe<br \/>\nreference court has no jurisdiction to declare acquisition<br \/>\nproceedings and the award declared by the Special Land Acquisition<br \/>\nOfficer under sec.35(3) of the Act as illegal and\/or non-est in a<br \/>\nreference under section 35(3) of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>[vi]\tThe<br \/>\nreference court has no jurisdiction to declare possession of the<br \/>\nacquiring body as illegal and\/or unauthorized and consequently the<br \/>\nreference court has no jurisdiction to declare the ONGC-acquiring<br \/>\nbody as trespasser that too without framing any issue.\n<\/p>\n<p>[vii]\tThe<br \/>\nreference court has no jurisdiction toward compensation by way of<br \/>\nmesne profit declaring compensation of the acquiring body as illegal<br \/>\nand unauthorized.\n<\/p>\n<p>[viii]\tThe<br \/>\nreference court has also no jurisdiction to award statutory benefits<br \/>\nand or interest, as awarded by the reference court, as if the<br \/>\nacquisition proceedings is a permanent acquisition.\n<\/p>\n<p>[ix]\tThe<br \/>\nreference court has no jurisdiction to determine the dispute with<br \/>\nregard to sufficiency of the compensation beyond the period of three<br \/>\nyears from the date of taking the possession.\n<\/p>\n<p>[x]\tThe<br \/>\nReference Court has no jurisdiction to restore the possession of the<br \/>\nland to the original owners while deciding the reference under<br \/>\nsec.35(3) of the Act.??\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\t\tAdmittedly<br \/>\nthe Reference Court has not considered the question of jurisdiction<br \/>\nand also the limitation and other questions as set out in the<br \/>\naforesaid judgment. In that view of the matter the Reference  Court<br \/>\nhas to reconsider the  issue in light of the  ratio laid down in the<br \/>\naforesaid judgment. This  proposition is not disputed by the learned<br \/>\nAdvocate for the respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\t\tHowever,<br \/>\nin view of the decision in the case  Patel Govindbhai Vs. Special<br \/>\nLand Acquisition officer, reported in 2006(2) GLR  1152, the<br \/>\ncontention that the  award of interest from the date on which the<br \/>\nannual rent became payable till the date of actual payment cannot be<br \/>\naccepted. In the said decision it is held that the interest is<br \/>\npayable from the date on which the annual rent became payable till<br \/>\nthe date of actual payment.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\t\tIn<br \/>\nthe case of  State of Maharashtra Vs. Maimuma Banu, reported in<br \/>\n(2003)7 SCC 448 it is held that on the facts of the case though<br \/>\nlandowners are not legally entitled, yet on equitable grounds<br \/>\ninterest at the rate of 6% was granted and that  provisions of<br \/>\nsections 17(3-A), 23(1-A), 28 and 34 are not applicable to rental<br \/>\ncompensation.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\t\tAt<br \/>\nthis stage is is also required to be noted that in the case of Brij<br \/>\nBehari Vs. State of UP reported in AIR 1986 SC 1895 it was held<br \/>\nthat  when possession had been taken under section 35 of the Act it<br \/>\nis not a case of acquisition under Part II thereof and that  in case<br \/>\nof temporary occupation of land solatium is not payable. It is also<br \/>\nrequired to be noted that section 34 makes provision for the rate of<br \/>\ninterest payable in case of permanent acquisition, while sections 35,<br \/>\n36 &amp; 37 provide for the rate of interest payable in case of<br \/>\ntemporary acquisition. This has been clearly distinguished in the<br \/>\ncase of Patel Govindbhai Ambaram Vs. Special Land Acquisition<br \/>\nOfficer and Anr. Reported in 2006(2) GLR 1152.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\t\tIn<br \/>\nthe premises aforesaid, these appeals are allowed. The judgment and<br \/>\naward impugned in these appeals are quashed and set aside. The<br \/>\nmatters are remanded to the Reference Court for fresh consideration<br \/>\nin light of the judgments in the case of Oil &amp; Natural Gas<br \/>\nCorporation Ltd,  State of Maharashtra, and in the case of Patel<br \/>\nGovindbhai (Supra). No order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[K.S.\n<\/p>\n<p>JHAVERI, J.]<\/p>\n<p>\/phalguni\/<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court General vs Spl.Laq on 4 August, 2008 Author: Ks Jhaveri,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print FA\/1298\/2000 6\/ 6 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 1298 of 2000 To FIRST APPEAL No. 1302 of 2000 ========================================================= GENERAL MANAGER &#8211; Appellant(s) Versus SPL.LAQ OFFICER &amp; 1 [&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-5250","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>General vs Spl.Laq on 4 August, 2008 - 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\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"General vs Spl.Laq on 4 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-08-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-07T07:05:42+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\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"General vs Spl.Laq on 4 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-07T07:05:42+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1105,\"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\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008\",\"name\":\"General vs Spl.Laq on 4 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-07T07:05:42+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"General vs Spl.Laq on 4 August, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"General vs Spl.Laq on 4 August, 2008 - 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\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"General vs Spl.Laq on 4 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-07T07:05:42+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\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"General vs Spl.Laq on 4 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-07T07:05:42+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008"},"wordCount":1105,"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\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008","name":"General vs Spl.Laq on 4 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-07T07:05:42+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/general-vs-spl-laq-on-4-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"General vs Spl.Laq on 4 August, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5250","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=5250"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5250\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5250"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5250"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5250"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}