{"id":59565,"date":"2008-11-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008"},"modified":"2017-08-13T00:21:29","modified_gmt":"2017-08-12T18:51:29","slug":"ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"M\/S Haji K Abdul Khader vs Sri Thimothy D’Souza on 11 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
M\/S Haji K Abdul Khader vs Sri Thimothy D’Souza on 11 November, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: V.Jagannathan<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALQRE\n\nDated \u00a3116 3. 1th day of November 2008 \".    \n\n;BEFORE: _,A. \nTHE HOINPBLE MRJUSTICEE ; V.JAG&N.NATH.?$\u00a7\u20ac._\n\nREVIEW PETITION N6. 299 1 ':2.c;0::2.. fv\n{En R.s.p..Ne. 207:4 \/ 2{>r;;r;s ;   \"\n\nB155?-'l'WEI3N :\n\nM} 3 Haji K.Abdu1 Kha\u00e9cr Bava\"&._ V\ufb01rms, '\n1BavaTi1e Factmy, A  _ \nAshoknagara, I\\\u00a3IaIzga1<3__r&~._-- 575 O{)f3a,._   .\nrepresented by the Ma\ufb01agi:1g"P.a\u00e9:*t;1ef' I   .\nSri Khasim Bava. " .  '  \n\n.. . Petitioner\n\n__   44B;;E:_".\u20acs.\u00ab.;+'i ;\u00ab.\ufb01s;;1;1pa.{,2{}()8, the  .AA_'.:w.fe\u00a71uireS to: be\n\nI'EiCOI1Si\u20ac\u00a7\u20ac1'\u20ac\u00a71 'zzgit suffmfs f;?:5'n9:_\"--c:\u00a2;ffain errors. The\n\nC0I1t\u20acI}{i0?1r!fi;3ku'\u00a7.i*5;A3 is \"that {h'<::1"e*is an error apparent an\nthe f\u00e9ce "of i:\u00a3'1_<~:\u00e9' F}:-;;\u20ac)I?r.1A' hi this regard, it is stated in\n\nthe I'evie\u20acv--. _p6ti1ti0_1:1A'::_if\u00a7z1t---*"\u20ac11c: respo11dr311t'$ father had. filed\n\n '~  _ '3":3"pg\u00a7{}icviatioif\u00a3" 'bsfsre: {I16 Land 'I':'.ibuI1ai fer garizt czf\n\n I  in respect of certa:iI1 exteixts at' land in\n\n 21\/4, :21\/5 and 26\/8 of B01"ur~\u00a5:3 vmage\n\n and t\ufb01\u00e9:.Land Tribmiaj, by its Ofd\u00e9l" dat\ufb01d 6.3. 1979, had\n\n"ii a\ufb01\u00e9xfzed the mid applicatian by C(}I1f\u20acI'I'i1"1g occupancy\n\n  figllts 01113! in respect of 28 cents in S..NCL 12 1\/5 and this\n\nerrder has become fmal a\ufb01d secondly, {ha p\ufb01fiti\ufb01li\ufb01l'\n\nEfzartiirz, who was the resgzondent in tilt: trial ccurt, had\n\n2\u00bb\n\ng- u\n\n\n\npu1*chase<:l the mulageni rights fmm the lanciiords. as per\n\nthe registered sale deed dated 243.2007. in vie33\u00e9.4:\u00a2if_V_th\u20ac\n\nsaid facts, the judgntmt of this court  \n\nappeal \ufb01led by the respondarjy by  \u00e9;si.de, tfie" \n\njudgment of the Iower app\u20ac11ate.\u20ac\u00bb.:co2:_f11";.. :2aIid._\u00bbr\u00e9\u00e9;tofif7gA1fiis,at\n\nof the trial court; req11i1'es _t.{;--,b\u20ac: revi&';r:ed _as.i._'\u00a3h.\u20acW '.'.--'\u20acVi\u20acW . L'\n\npetijgioner has b\u00a7_e11    Eon} the\naforc:-:1ne:1tio:1ed c1c}<:V:_\u00a7i'1:;:..ae13Jt';<aL.'"'t\u00a7j\u00a7\u00a7 V:1*s$p0ndent in the\nsecond a1;1peaf\u00a7 h;a.d lg\u00e9\u00e9\u00e9lii\ufb01  the eI11:.ire: suit\npropert\u00a7s_   9f the judwmrit\n\nis sai;1gh\u00a7;.-- \n3. in"~3L1;3;_30Vrf. ':ifti1\u00e9.\u00bb.14eview* petitian, the SL1bi11iSSiO1"1\n\n by fh\u00a7"ie.;_~af1:*\u00a71ed: senior counsel Shri K\ufb01ubba Raaiis\n\n. 121.3: t_:hz:*:_v::\u00e9$;<:_ cf the review petitioner comes within the\n\n  63;" Order 47 R1116 1 of the C.P.C. and the\n\nres%ie\u00a71?'p\u00e9tition\u20ac1' was prevented from su\ufb01iciem cause in\n\n .. xI:*o--t_ bfingzlg to the notice if this 301111: ciiuring the\n\n };1\u00e9\u00e9\u00a71"iz1g of the se(:c:11\u00e9 appeal abcxust, the pzarchztse of the\n\n suit pI'O}3(\u00b0:I"t\u00a7f by the review petitioner and abeut the\n\nLand Tribunal ganting occupancy riglats ta the\n\n2*:\n\n\n\n4\nrespondent 01:11}; in raspecfg of S,N0.i_i2 1\/5 112:: the extant of<\/pre>\n
28 <3-ants and, as such, ta meet the ends of gizstice,<\/p>\n
review of the judg1ne11t rexldered by this <:;r3;1:;'t_.t mg:<\/p>\n
secand appeal, therefom, is necsssary.\n<\/p>\n
4, The learrled senior ceunz\u00e9el   t.3.u\u00a7:{<\/p>\n
paramount inttizrest of that: _courts._ 1:31″. }a.w -;i;’-3. ivtci r\u00a3\u00a7ride19′ ,<\/p>\n
justice and if the court.  th\u00e9’e1fE:\u00a5c::f pfgssed was
\nunder a mistake: “if the  is actmptad as a<\/p>\n
valid reasorx, \u00a311631 fh\u20ac..ffC13I”t_ f1a$.”‘eve*i\u00a7;— “power to resa\ufb02<\/p>\n
the 0:rdt=ii*’  “”Ff1::fcfo14\u00e9_;”rr3i’erri11g 1:0 the documents<\/p>\n
now Sga\ufb01ght id v.3Lf.;::*1%’a:~c:c}1;-1c\u00a2=:~;d along with the review<\/p>\n
petitign, ‘\u00a3Efi%’3 V5Llv\u00a7Z}.El1i\u00a7’3_Si\u20ac\u00a7f} is made tllat there can be 110<\/p>\n
” V’  f@’ti:;\u00e9:rs.;~ 011\u00bb the g\ufb01\u00e9w\u00e9r of this court to review its own<\/p>\n
   rggard to the grotmds mentioned<\/p>\n
\ufb01i\ufb02\ufb01er  Rule 1 of ‘\u20ac115: (::aPaQ’:s and 11116 case 0f the<\/p>\n
 ;;e:i<:i:;;j;-::~ra;1s Wiihifl the ambit 9:' the ma gonna viz,<\/p>\n
  far _}3.ny Oth\ufb01l" sufficient reasan, and, therefara, placing<\/p>\n
  _,,_.\u00a7'\u20acIianc\u20ac can the decisions of the Apex (3oL1:'t: repeated in<\/p>\n
A.\u00a3.R. 2688 SACE. "3719 and 1993 Supp (4) S.C'.Ci, 595, the<\/p>\n
iaamed senier cmi\ufb01s\/(E21 stabmmeci that as there is an<\/p>\n
,4-\n<\/p>\n
5<\/span>
\nermr appazmzt on the face of the record in the judgment<\/p>\n
rendsred by this ccxurt, a case: is made 03.1′: for review of<\/p>\n
the said judgzent of {his court.\n<\/p>\n
5′ (3-11 the other harzd, % ieamed  <\/p>\n
Sa1%1athku:In3.r Siietty for the reS\ufb01\u20ac)i1(?:\u00ab=;1″:~\u00a3: s11\u00a5;A$\ufb011 iF;t\u00a2\u00a5:i:V”tIi2t<\/p>\n
C’<\/p>\n
the petitioner has fajied to _ma1<:-: Lii:._a ::ase1g ft)? ;i*c:vE4\u00e9ivA by<\/p>\n
the ju::1@1\u20acn'{ rendered by ‘f;\ufb01;:’1S\u00bbcourt” <\/p>\n
the instaxat, case 15.33194: 01″i\u00e9H;iri93:\ufb02c\u00a3iiL’-attiacf\u00e9; ;\u00e9}.I1\u00a7; Of the
\nt.h1’6:e \u00a7”0uz1ds 1I1<-*:11ti0r1<:5\u00ab:1AV_Vt;i*;\u20aci<%iV1*   Rule 1 of the<\/p>\n
{.1i.i?.C; """  E:itg;bdfg:s1*c\u00a7:1g.9th,e Sai\ufb01-kubmission, the iearrxed
\nco12nS\u00a7e}, a;~gt:e\u00a7:i  '@101; a case: of any new ground<\/p>\n
being dis:z:'<;"2xre're:*,ci'V,a1':\u00bb5_i inipc3rtant mattar 01' evidence being<\/p>\n
 "  _   'k\ufb01\ufb01fwiedge of the petitioner zzvan a\ufb01er<\/p>\n
 _ '<~:\u00a7; ::*1"::i'sse s:\u00abf"  diiigence and it is not 3. case coming<\/p>\n
  E;3.'I1bit 01' the third gound v\u00a7:\u00ab:., 'a.:1:1y ether<\/p>\n
 su\ufb01iclent reasun. 'I'hc=:ref0re, though the rsvmw<\/p>\n
 g3c:_\ufb01ti0:1e:r dici take a Stand in the WI'itt<%:11 statemazat<\/p>\n
   __2ib0ut the occupalzcy righm being :10: granted to the<\/p>\n
msp<:=:'1d\u20acr1\u00a5;, yet, the review p\u20act:iti011er did net _press the<\/p>\n
said cozitentien mu\ufb02fuxthar ei\ufb02mr before the triai<\/p>\n
court; 01* before: the lower appeilate Court or fqij that<\/p>\n
;:’3:1;\u00e9\u00a7;1t Inatitc’z”V.ci\u00a7{,\u00a7e:\u00e9”:,1″i\u00a3:\u00e9t <:ome <\/p>\n
i\ufb02to the picture.\n<\/p>\n
6. As far as the geurgtii \u00abif due _.<;1iii.g'$i3\u00ab:;\u20ac is concerned,<\/p>\n
tha learned :C0\ufb01IiS\u20ac1  \ufb01led by the<\/p>\n
reviewjii\u00e9ii1:j\u00a7I1e1*'7;':i<:ft51*::-L"'\u00a3his E:6urt along with the review
\npf3tii1i(\u00a7i'-'1 its :\u00a7ubVIi;\u00a71;.:i1a';t'T"tk;:*; review petitioner has clearly<\/p>\n
stated ti1\u00e9i~~1j'\u20ac: :J1Vic'i i';9\u00a3""\ufb011'oduce the dGCL1I'i1\u20acI13ZS thinking<\/p>\n
   \u00a31233 a3tl}efV';'\u00a7id\u00e9 wauid Qroduca the 53:n:1<:: and,<\/p>\n
  ~  \u20ac'_'{"1i_;:s explazlation effar\u00e9d by the review<\/p>\n
 }\u00a7;'i$eif establish\ufb01s that the r\ufb01view pe:titi:::n<:1'<\/p>\n
 was f'1'3 _\u00a7JOSS\u20acS$i0I1 of the ciacunxents in quimtian but, he<\/p>\n
 di\ufb01 319: produce the same for T.'\u20ac:':E1SGI1S best k:n0wI": ti) him<\/p>\n
    __-rind, '{:h<5::'e.fo1*e, having :1v.::~t bean diiigent, it is net 013611 to<\/p>\n
the I'(i'f\u00a5.?i\u20acW petitioner new {:0 seek for irevi\u00e9w of \u00a3116<\/p>\n
jL1dg1":1eI1t 0:3 the gaund of pmduction sf additicsnai<\/p>\n
b<\/p>\n
. o<\/p>\n
7<\/span>
\n. . f .\n<\/p>\n
d9<.:u111\u20ac:I1t.s. Even the ground viz, anther suf\ufb01clam<\/p>\n
'1
\nreassn, alss does net get attracted to the izlstajilt-_c:ase<\/p>\n
because, even on merits, the trial court hats.-:~~ftj'g;n'1_:.\u00a7".j*t.1i"\u00a23,,t<\/p>\n
the def\ufb01ndant had concacied of it being 'a, L.1:z.:1Td\u00e9:_j  <\/p>\n
the: respendtzznt. herein u;r;.der a ;:'eg's'1ies:-*::d._ <\/p>\n
after the expiry of the least: _t\u20acHH,"  cleftt\ufb01fiaiaf 1)\u00a7=3;cz\u00a7\u00a5.,;113.<\u00a7:",,<\/p>\n
a te:t1a1"1t holding over =..i_Vi1f1f:_I'ef01f"\u00a3:, jtft1'is :<;j<:a1:11'3; has
\nrightiy re5t<::1'ed the  bf.__ :1:;e\u00ab.:1~1a1 court fer the
\n1'easo::1s aiready assig1i;_e\u00a7ii_   its jucigment.<\/p>\n
7. ~E}V’&:1,.  i1: :’%s\u00ab \u00e9aken f6f””\u00e9rgun1cnt Sake that the
\nrevi.&1%%_,{}\u00a5::*.?\u00a3iiii<:::fi(::\u00a7*=.Ijas\u00a7'};;;,;zrohas6d thee mukageiai rights<\/p>\n
undcr a 14eg,'is't~:::fe?-_d Sai\ufb01tlead, yet, the same wili not alter<\/p>\n
 *  _ tt'4E\u00a7:":pG_'$\u00a7:io:1 ofV"tha::–'1-'\u00e9spmadant insofar as the 190336551011<\/p>\n
  :1? V \u00a7}3;\u20ac':3":.-'-,ft,_'3;it4.""p,_IV'c:";;j)(\u20acI"1:,sr is COI}{3\u20acIT.i\u20acd and it is far '\u00a3116 review<\/p>\n
'p'\u00a3ifE,itio:}<%:i* ?\u00a7.(;T:; take necessary steps as is opal] 110 it to<\/p>\n
 recov'erA'1.pessession fmna tha respoxacisnt and Inereiy<\/p>\n
 Ea\ufb01\u00e9\u00e9smse sf \u00a3113 iI1t(?.I'\u20acS3; of tha \u00a353301' and U16 telzant gets<\/p>\n
   I}:3@1"ged in one agta\u00e9 the same persen, that will next in any<\/p>\n
way a\ufb01bct the position: of the r\u20ac:sp0:1d<:11t hf3I"\u20ac:iI}. In<\/p>\n
suppart Qf ai} the suwsions, the 1\u20aca1'1"."i{id CO1};\u00a31S\u20acI Shri<\/p>\n
, I<\/p>\n
8<\/span>
\nSanathkumar S11ettj\u00a7,: placed I”\u20ac1i8.I1C\u20ac3 on the c1<:":v:::isins<\/p>\n
reported in A132. 1960 Mysore 214 and LLR. 2006<\/p>\n
Karnataka 3936.\n<\/p>\n
8. in the \ufb01ght. 0:? the above SI}bI:\ufb01iSSi011\u00a7$.._\u00a7;i\u00a7C:\u00a3: :\u00a71*1$:1<\/p>\n
the decisions cited, the paint for c(11i’e:.iVG1c:fcaf:I<)!1T' -.is <\/p>\n
whetluer a cast: is made out faf Mi;\u00e9iiit:*.\u00a7s"<.Qf -:1}-1\u00a7_\u00a3 <\/p>\n
rendered by this court _.cg"1  <\/p>\n
2{}?4\/ 21396. 4\n<\/p>\n
9. The scope of 1*r:\u00a7.\u00e9i\u00a2w 1.   1 Of the<\/p>\n
\u00a3’,.P.(ii, is \u00ab1iI:V*1i–ted_ tn  maitl grounds via, (1) can the
\ng1″::;1md ‘cf -:_iist’:m\u00a7\u00e9::If};.- fjf. iiew and ixnportant matter or<\/p>\n
eVj;\u00a7i6i2ae Whi’:.:A3:1,V after the exemisa cf due diligence, was<\/p>\n
  his knawiadge or cauld not be produced by<\/p>\n
H  8;: \u00ab fiat: *’\u00a7i:\u00a31e when the dacree was passed 9:’ order<\/p>\n
ma\u00e9\u00e9c,’- 01*”{1’I) on acceunt cf same mistake car erroz’<\/p>\n
  apggag\ufb01zt on 1:133 face of the I”‘6C()I”d, 8}” (331) for any other<\/p>\n
 :$z,:\ufb01icic:11t regsgn.\n<\/p>\n
V’ ”  As far as the f1I’Si gounci is concemed, the mssi\ufb01w<\/p>\n
pt-stitionex’ has taken a sp\u00e9aczi\ufb01c stand in the W’I’iti6I’1<\/p>\n
.3\u00bb<\/p>\n
V\/<\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
statammzt abmit ‘(ha plaixltiif having East the: case: in
\nseeki\ufb01g <:x:cL1paI:cy rights from the L:.=m<:1 Tribunal. But,<\/p>\n
the said \u00a33.VE'.I"'II1(i\u00a7).t macie in the W'.{'.itt\u20acI1 stat@mei_it.was<\/p>\n
not carried to its logical and either by p1'<\/p>\n
disposed of and even at llhtti 0f iiiaiiter being
\nlisted for being spoi’i’v.vi’..”1\u00e9;’_&;j*.;;,**;”i\u00a73r*\u00bbi’.:._, the question of<\/p>\n
discovery of nrzw ancb   subs\ufb01querit to<\/p>\n
the civ:ispL9 ‘the occupancy rights issue is COI”1(.’:\u20acI’}T1\u20ac3d.<\/p>\n
 As,”i’f”grV’ as the exercise czf due diligence is<\/p>\n
 cozic\ufb01xjicd, in the very affidavit that is filed<\/p>\n
 z’\ufb01,C{i\u00e9IIlf}\u20aciI1:$?iI}g the review petitir31’1, it is St\u00e9itfid ‘that the<\/p>\n
   feview petitioner was uiider the beriafide ii::1p:*<3ssiI1<\/p>\n
that the Giher side Weuicl \u00a71F(}{Z11.1C\u20ac the (iocumem: 12*iz., the<\/p>\n
Qrdef passaci by the Land Tribunal. But, thif\u00e9 it.s<_~":}.f<\/p>\n
2*'<\/p>\n
.1<\/p>\n
19<\/span>
\nindicates that the review pstitimaex’ was fully aware of<\/p>\n
the dscument in questian but, he did not prodwjcg the<\/p>\n
same. and, 011 the oth\u00e9za’ hand, he slept: QV<:1?._ 1ji:\u00bb .\u00a7j1*:;iy 't.\u00a7;<\/p>\n
wake up after '[116 disposal of the  <\/p>\n
The1'efo:'e, the qL1\u20ac:StiO}f1 of
\ndiligence gmund dges not Va\ufb01s\ufb01. V4 . . V' . V'<\/p>\n
12. In this c011I1ecti0n, it  _fei\u00e9\u00a7\u00e9f\u00a7\u00a3  g\u00e9gfeg ts) the
\nde<::is,:i11 of this  \u00bb.v.\u00a7’$i”e;:Irf1inc1t’}z “Vs; Govin\u00e9
\nRae, reportcd   1-,1    34, WIISIEEE,<\/p>\n
daalhagivi\u00e9il\ufb01ij,L115:31}\u00e9}:;\u00a71*::VSsioIi_'””‘\u00e9:\u00bb\u00a7era::ise of due diligence”
\nu:’1der -Ofdezf -4?’: Eihis cu.rt has obseznreci that<\/p>\n
r1oI1;~\u00a71:0c:11i’%:”\u00a5’_’;_\u20ac3I:.V(3f t2f1e”‘iEc\u20ac:1ce by 1:113 jaeiitienezz’ Cazmat<\/p>\n
  . bc.._g{‘ gf\u20ac)L11′}(Zi to i’\u00e9V’ieW the case as 311716 review petitioner<\/p>\n
  \u20acx’.s’_2:1$’  he was requix\ufb01d to _pr0r:iu<:e the iices-:'nce<\/p>\n
i1i\u00bb._0rd\u00a2:"f  'sucmed in his claim and 1:1 Vi\ufb01w of the<\/p>\n
 petiti\u00e9azl\u00e9i' not stating the C'-i3"C1_1I\ufb02St8J"\u00a3C\u20ac3S under which he<\/p>\n
 -.’1:35t_: sig}1t cf the \u20acXiSt(f:1″\u00a7,C\u20ac 0f the 1i(:a11<:& or of the steps<\/p>\n
VA  V.  tee}: to S\u20ac8}C{3h for it 81191 preduce the sama, this<\/p>\n
901.11%, th\ufb01refom, held that the peti\ufb01aner did I19? givs<\/p>\n
$u\u00a7'\ufb01Ciui:r1t mason to SHOW that the licemte CO'L\ufb01d 1101: be<\/p>\n
}<\/p>\n
An<\/p>\n
Li<\/p>\n
prcidueed either at the time of filing of the suit <31' at a
\nhater stage and even at the stage of Second Vappeal.<\/p>\n
Therefere, {:11 these gmmds, this court <\/p>\n
lack ef diligence and delay en the part ef   <\/p>\n
has disemtitled him to seek t;1eyr\u00e91:e\u00a3.at \u00e9ija\ufb01dsci" the  <\/p>\n
court. Thie decision applies t.<5.__the iI1ste;;'1f'veasc: Vales.'<\/p>\n
beczmlse, the petitioner  say  i1ie'.=a\ufb01id83.%it that.'<\/p>\n
even with due di\ufb01gehee, 11e"'ee-'gic1V–V'i1et lagfvvhaiids to the
\ndocuments new sought i:r"\u00a7_ be'  \u00bb\u00a7')fr;11:, on the other<\/p>\n
hand, his e::'p1.a;f\u00a7=a\ufb01o\u00a7} iz1e1:\u00a3ca';te7s\u00a7'~ithe1:V:V.}E1e was fully aware<\/p>\n
of  \u00ab:ieez.1mer:!j 4' bei:'1wgz'i::1 'pessessien, but deepite that,
\nhe dees"–:;1_0f"\u00a3 Vpfodigee'  Waite fer the other side to<\/p>\n
proq\u00e9\ufb01lice I:11e"_a1'1d, as aiready n1e11t:ioned, even<\/p>\n
. {:im;i1:.g't1"ie 't:z);urse of the hearirxg of the entire second<\/p>\n
  '\u00e9eiT1f;:i'A'\u00a7::.Si:.113seque11t1y at the stage of the matter<\/p>\n
beiilg, "ta;ke11 for being spoken to, the review petgitienel'<\/p>\n
2  \u00a7:1id\u00ab.._net bring to the notice of the court as to this<\/p>\n
i;'\u00a30e:.1I:1e1'1L<\/p>\n
'    3. As far as the eaee falling under any ether sufficient.<\/p>\n
reason is ceneeined, 115 court has dispesed of the<\/p>\n
12<\/span>
\nS\u20acC\u20ac)\ufb02C\u00a7 appeal on the basis 0f the a1’gt:ment,s advanczed<\/p>\n
by the iea:r’I1ed CGLIIISEI far the parties and, at no jzjeint Gf<\/p>\n
time, the grourzd relating to occuparicy <\/p>\n
been rejected and the petitioner    <\/p>\n
mulageni rights under th<=::  S316' ._ dseti ~ . f;V:1f "'w\u00e9;s<\/p>\n
mentioI1ed.. Tharefore, havilzg r\ufb01-gard to  ivi\u00e9w <\/p>\n
by this ceurt 'based on the i('\u00a7'\u20ac:.:;3}i::-":1:1\u00a5:.:':oV1"1.*.~'~_  faiwar\ufb01 and<\/p>\n
in the light. of the itiniy f\u00a7"Q1:1}L1(i,\u00a5'i?'\u00a7T1.iCh  seriousiy
\n\u00a3:01'1t\u00a2:st.4i’ ih.\u00e9 ‘i’.}\u00a5:’.A\u20acc’i.’, }  61″ 12%: View that 119 after
\nappa\ufb01zjent;  _ f’ace4..;:$fv…:i:e.’ record can be said ‘:9 have
\nC)CCL1ZE’3T’\u20ac(\u00a7  in tTf11=:”;ii;1cigiiK:Vt:4I1t that is 110:5: sszmglit to ba<\/p>\n
rasr\ufb01g\u00e9ived and sv\u00e9n in the very decisien referred to by the<\/p>\n
.A i6,3I’11\u20ac3d S\u00a73i1;iQ1′ counsel in the Case Gf S\ufb01agirathi Ammal<\/p>\n
   Cathczziilc Mission, rsperteci in A.I.i?E.<\/p>\n
  19, it has beer: Qbsexved by the Apex Ceurt<\/p>\n
 ., “iixaiz; r\u00e9vicw is pemnissible onijg if the jud\u00a711e:1t;’ srder is<\/p>\n
 “s;ii;i’.a1:ed by an apparsnt. armr car it is a palpable vvreng<\/p>\n
V’  “aim if the e1:’r<::r is szzi\ufb01evidezxt, than oniy the quastion cf<\/p>\n
app\u00a3yi1'1g the principles as provided under {}f"Ci\u20ac},' 4'? Rule<\/p>\n
}<\/p>\n
'I<\/p>\n
13<\/span>
\n1 of the Ci.P.C:, Games 31111) picture. {:1 tht\ufb01 izistaxat. Cass,<\/p>\n
E (ii) not See 3115:” 0f the \u00a3:’1.b{)V\u20ac fa<:i:.0r$ being Inadegut 5}?<\/p>\n
the: r\u20ac:v'iew p\u00e9tititrmer.\n<\/p>\n
14. Eva”: as regards the merits Gf .- {Ii’1\u20ac “is<\/p>\n
::m”1cer:1\u20acd, the decisimi r\u20acfe1*.::’&d-. in by  t};i:: i:”:a{%.”I1″‘c:d ‘<\/p>\n
cmmael fat’ the 1’\u20acSp{}I1d\u20acI’}t;   <:a$\u20ac:  uf,V \u00a2\u00a7fGf7\u00a7a\u00a7pa<\/p>\n
Kortctri Vs. {David Pintd}-..,4?:"i*::poI;i\u00e9\u20aci__ 'iI:A1i":12\u00a3)O6 <\/p>\n
Iiainataka 3936, iay<s d9w:1"'L5.\u00a7f:'– \ufb01r-9p0siAf;i0r1 {sf Law that<\/p>\n
'E:.1"1e right if 'the mx\ufb02ag\u00e9-:\u00a7n;i\u20acia2*..\u20ac3zt" 51._1 b~1::13jiagenidar craimot<\/p>\n
be e:::f;tiiigVL1i::i\u00e9:1ed"7'g\u00e9xc_\u00e9:pf'in  caste of Vialation 0f the
\nCOI1difif)\ufb02S o:':n:1\u00a7\u00a71gA\u00e91?i4ra}at\u00a711g ta paymamt of rent and if<\/p>\n
ar.1};ib<_3dy 1fi:::1j\u00a2i":a"$;e$"vfii\u00e9"right of muiagar, the 3mm: will<\/p>\n
   zs1_1\u00a53_j'Vc%(\u00a7%:""'C<\u00a7 the right if mtllagenitlar or sub<\/p>\n
  iz.:1iiag\u00a7:}ia:it:\u00a511t_ 1..'1'heref0r\u20ac:, I do not see any cass \ufb0218.Cif: gut<\/p>\n
f;i(:i't%L{i\u00a5Z}I'i\u20acT far this court to review \u00a3116 judgrztasizt;<\/p>\n
 pass\u00e9dfin 1&6.2{3{}8i11 R.S5A.\u00a7xE0. 2i)74\/2006'<\/p>\n
 .H{)W\u20acVf:I*, in View of the; submiasion ma\ufb01a by "Elm<\/p>\n
' "  'iearmzd :1::’1$ei for the r*esp0:1d\u20ac11’t that the respsnd\u00e9nf;<\/p>\n
has taken passession 95 the suit, pr013\u20acr*\u00a3y and the said<\/p>\n
,>’*<\/p>\n
V. I<\/p>\n
:4
\nstibniission being disputed by the leamasd 345311101′<\/p>\n
counsei for the mview petitierzer, r10twithsta11di:1g the
\nVi<3W taken by this court that the 1'evie;w ;:\u00bb<:t:i13;:i<:'2'1,3 "".\u00a3;1<:;\u20ac:s<\/p>\n
not IIICTTJZ any Consideration, yet, the review p\u20ac,ti.:i<3;g1f:ij, if tr<\/p>\n
able to establish that it has becoma   Glf  , <\/p>\n
' ,<\/p>\n
suit scheduie pr0pe1"t;y, is at \ufb01_Ii)<:*:}{f\u00a7y7
\nsteps as is caper; it; it in .1315".\n<\/p>\n
Th\ufb01 rczview petition staIid$’dis1?aiS’s<:d_.' I E<\/p>\n
ckc\/\u00bb<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court M\/S Haji K Abdul Khader vs Sri Thimothy D’Souza on 11 November, 2008 Author: V.Jagannathan IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALQRE Dated \u00a3116 3. 1th day of November 2008 “. ;BEFORE: _,A. THE HOINPBLE MRJUSTICEE ; V.JAG&N.NATH.?$\u00a7\u20ac._ REVIEW PETITION N6. 299 1 ‘:2.c;0::2.. fv {En R.s.p..Ne. 207:4 \/ 2{>r;;r;s ; […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-59565","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nM\/S Haji K Abdul Khader vs Sri Thimothy D'Souza on 11 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S Haji K Abdul Khader vs Sri Thimothy D'Souza on 11 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-08-12T18:51:29+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=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S Haji K Abdul Khader vs Sri Thimothy D’Souza on 11 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-12T18:51:29+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":2406,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S Haji K Abdul Khader vs Sri Thimothy D'Souza on 11 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-12T18:51:29+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S Haji K Abdul Khader vs Sri Thimothy D’Souza on 11 November, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"M\/S Haji K Abdul Khader vs Sri Thimothy D'Souza on 11 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S Haji K Abdul Khader vs Sri Thimothy D'Souza on 11 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-08-12T18:51:29+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":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S Haji K Abdul Khader vs Sri Thimothy D’Souza on 11 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-12T18:51:29+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008"},"wordCount":2406,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008","name":"M\/S Haji K Abdul Khader vs Sri Thimothy D'Souza on 11 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-12T18:51:29+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-haji-k-abdul-khader-vs-sri-thimothy-dsouza-on-11-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S Haji K Abdul Khader vs Sri Thimothy D’Souza on 11 November, 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:\/\/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\/59565","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=59565"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59565\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=59565"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=59565"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=59565"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}