{"id":57226,"date":"2011-03-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-03-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011"},"modified":"2016-09-11T15:24:11","modified_gmt":"2016-09-11T09:54:11","slug":"mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011","title":{"rendered":"Mohd. Din vs Chief Engineer on 15 March, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Jammu High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Mohd. Din vs Chief Engineer on 15 March, 2011<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n \n HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU.            \nAA No. 62 OF 2001  \nMohd. Din \nPetitioners\nChief Engineer, PWD &amp; anr. \nRespondent  \n!Mr. O.P.Thakur, Advocate \n^Ms. Neeru Goswami, Dy.A.G   \n\nMr. Justice J.P.Singh\nDate: 15.03.2011 \n:J U D G M E N T :\n<\/pre>\n<p>Disputes arising out of the Contract allotted to Mohd. Din,<br \/>\nby the Jammu and Kashmir State Government, in respect of,<br \/>\nImprovement and Development of formation widening Batote-<br \/>\nKishtwar _HIP by way of earth work and walling including<br \/>\nconstruction of breast walls, parapets and V shape drain in Km<br \/>\n14\/980-46\/350 Khelani zigs, were referred to the sole Arbitration<br \/>\nof the Chief Engineer, PWD (R&amp;B), Jammu, in terms of the<br \/>\nContract Agreement between the parties.<br \/>\nAggrieved by the conduct of the Arbitrator, Mohd. Din<br \/>\napproached this Court by his Arbitration Application No.34\/98<br \/>\nseeking the removal of the Arbitrator and appointment of another<br \/>\nArbitrator in his place.\n<\/p>\n<p>His plea was allowed by the Court, And vide order dated<br \/>\n16.08.2000, Sh. A.N.Saraf, Retired District and Sessions Judge<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">2<\/span><br \/>\nwas appointed Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between<br \/>\nthe parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>Sh. Saraf entered upon the Reference, who on finding that<br \/>\nthe Chief Engineer and other functionaries of the State<br \/>\nGovernment were not cooperating with the arbitration<br \/>\nproceedings, proceeded to adjudicate the disputes referred to<br \/>\nhim, setting the State ex-parte.\n<\/p>\n<p>After the State was set ex-parte, Mohd. Din-Contractor,<br \/>\nlodged additional Claim seeking its adjudication as well by the<br \/>\nArbitrator.\n<\/p>\n<p>The learned Arbitrator allowed the Claims and the<br \/>\nadditional Claim vide his Award of November 23, 2001.<br \/>\nThe Award having been filed in the Court, notices were<br \/>\nissued to the parties to file Objections, if any, thereto.<br \/>\nResponding to the notice issued on the Arbitrators Award,<br \/>\nthe State-respondents sought setting aside of the Award on<br \/>\nvarious grounds.\n<\/p>\n<p>The Memo of Objections filed by the State in this regard<br \/>\nhas been registered as CMP No.57\/2004.\n<\/p>\n<p>Taking the pleadings of the parties on the Staterespondents<br \/>\nchallenge to the Award in consideration, the parties<br \/>\nwere put to issues, which read thus:\n<\/p>\n<p>1) Whether the Arbitrator has mis-conducted<br \/>\nhimself or the proceedings?\n<\/p>\n<p>OP Objector.\n<\/p>\n<p>2) Whether Award is otherwise invalid?\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>OP Objector.\n<\/p>\n<p>3) Relief.\n<\/p>\n<p>The evidence on the issues was led by the parties by<br \/>\nAffidavits.\n<\/p>\n<p>Learned counsel appearing for the State-respondents<br \/>\nquestioned the Award on three grounds, viz.\n<\/p>\n<p>1. The Award was nullity in law and liable to be set aside<br \/>\nfor having been made and published, after the time<br \/>\nprescribed for the purpose under the Jammu &amp; Kashmir<br \/>\nArbitration Act, 2002.\n<\/p>\n<p>2. In case the Award was held to have been filed within the<br \/>\ntime allowed by the Court, it was, even otherwise, liable<br \/>\nto be set aside, in that, the additional Claim allowed by<br \/>\nthe Arbitrator, without allowing opportunity of hearing to<br \/>\nthe State therein, amounted to Arbitrators misconduct<br \/>\nrendering the Award invalid as a whole for violation of<br \/>\nthe principles of Natural Justice.\n<\/p>\n<p>3. The interest allowed on the Award being excessive and<br \/>\nunconscionable, the Award needed modification.<br \/>\nI have considered the submissions of the learned counsel<br \/>\nfor the parties and perused the records.<br \/>\nThe perusal of the records of the Arbitrator indicates that<br \/>\nvide this Courts order of September 24, 2001 on CMP No.<br \/>\n66\/2001, the Arbitrator was allowed last extension of four months<br \/>\nto make and publish the Award, condoning the intervening delay.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>The Arbitrator, thus, having made and published the Award<br \/>\non 23.11.2001 was within the time allowed by the Court and there<br \/>\nis, therefore, no merit in the first submission of the learned State<br \/>\ncounsel, which is, accordingly, rejected.<br \/>\nIn so far as the second submission of the learned State<br \/>\ncounsel is concerned, I find sufficient force therein, for, after<br \/>\nhaving set the State-respondents ex-parte, the learned Arbitrator<br \/>\nhad the jurisdiction to deal with only Claims, which stood referred<br \/>\nto him and on no other fresh claim, unless he had heard the State<br \/>\non fresh Claim.\n<\/p>\n<p>It was admitted by the parties that the additional Claim was<br \/>\nlodged after the respondents were set ex-parte and no notice<br \/>\nwas issued by the Arbitrator to the State-respondents for their<br \/>\nResponse thereto.\n<\/p>\n<p>In these circumstances, the Arbitrator had, therefore, acted<br \/>\nbeyond his jurisdiction in making the Award on the Contractors<br \/>\nadditional Claim. The error committed by him in making the<br \/>\nAward on the additional Claim, without following the principles of<br \/>\nNatural Justice is, thus, apparent on the face of records.<br \/>\nThe additional Claim of Rs. 1,50,000\/- along with interest<br \/>\nthereon, as allowed by the Arbitrator, cannot thus be sustained.<br \/>\nAs the Claims allowed by the Arbitrator are clearly<br \/>\nseparable, so only that portion of the Award which allows the<br \/>\nadditional Claim, would required setting aside as Arbitrators<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">5<\/span><br \/>\nmisconduct in respect of other Claims, as alleged, has not been<br \/>\nproved, and that is why not agitated, and rightly so at the time of<br \/>\nhearing of the case.\n<\/p>\n<p>The plea of the learned State counsel that whole of the<br \/>\nAward was liable to be set aside because of the Arbitrators<br \/>\nmisconduct in allowing the additional claim of Rs. 1,50,000\/-, is,<br \/>\nhowever, not found tenable, in that, looking to the nature of the<br \/>\nmisconduct for violation of the principles of Natural Justice in<br \/>\nallowing the additional Claim, it is only that claim which would<br \/>\nbecomes unsustainable and not rest of the Award of the<br \/>\nArbitrator, which is not found suffering from any misconduct.<br \/>\nIn so far as the third submission of the learned State<br \/>\ncounsel is concerned, suffice would it be to say that the Arbitrator<br \/>\nhad the jurisdiction to award interest and the finding recorded by<br \/>\nhim allowing 12% interest on the amount awarded, may not be<br \/>\nopen to challenge in these proceedings, which are not in the<br \/>\nnature of Appeal against the findings and Award of the Arbitrator,<br \/>\nand additionally because the rate of interest awarded by the<br \/>\nArbitrator, looked from any angle, does not appears<br \/>\nunconscionable as argued by the learned State Counsel.<br \/>\nCMP No.57\/2004 of the State-respondents, therefore,<br \/>\nneeds to be allowed to the extent indicated herein above.<br \/>\nAccordingly, the Award dated 23.11.2001 made by<br \/>\nSh. Amar Nath Saraf, Retired District &amp; Sessions Judge, is set<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">6<\/span><br \/>\naside to the extent it allows Claim No.4 of Rs.1,50,000\/- in favour<br \/>\nof Mohd. Din-claimant. The interest allowed on this amount too<br \/>\nwould stand set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>Rest of the Award for an amount of Rs.4,00,000\/- alongwith<br \/>\ninterest @12% per annum, therefore, sustains for making it a<br \/>\nRule of the Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>The Award made by the Arbitrator for an amount of<br \/>\nRs.4,00,000\/- alongwith interest @ 12% per annum is, therefore,<br \/>\nmade a Rule of the Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>Registrar to draw Decree accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>A.A. No.62\/2001 and CMP No.57\/2004 are disposed of<br \/>\naccordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>(J. P. Singh)<br \/>\nJudge<br \/>\nJAMMU<br \/>\n15.03.2011<br \/>\nPawan Chopra  <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jammu High Court Mohd. Din vs Chief Engineer on 15 March, 2011 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU. AA No. 62 OF 2001 Mohd. Din Petitioners Chief Engineer, PWD &amp; anr. Respondent !Mr. O.P.Thakur, Advocate ^Ms. Neeru Goswami, Dy.A.G Mr. Justice J.P.Singh Date: 15.03.2011 :J U D G M E N T : [&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":[8,17],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-57226","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jammu-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Mohd. Din vs Chief Engineer on 15 March, 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\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mohd. Din vs Chief Engineer on 15 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-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=\"2011-03-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-09-11T09:54:11+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\\\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mohd. Din vs Chief Engineer on 15 March, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-03-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-11T09:54:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1072,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jammu High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011\",\"name\":\"Mohd. Din vs Chief Engineer on 15 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-03-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-11T09:54:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mohd. Din vs Chief Engineer on 15 March, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"Mohd. Din vs Chief Engineer on 15 March, 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\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mohd. Din vs Chief Engineer on 15 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-03-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-09-11T09:54:11+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\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mohd. Din vs Chief Engineer on 15 March, 2011","datePublished":"2011-03-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-11T09:54:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011"},"wordCount":1072,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jammu High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011","name":"Mohd. Din vs Chief Engineer on 15 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-03-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-11T09:54:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-din-vs-chief-engineer-on-15-march-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mohd. Din vs Chief Engineer on 15 March, 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:\/\/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\/57226","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=57226"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/57226\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=57226"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=57226"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=57226"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}