{"id":63490,"date":"2010-11-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-11-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010"},"modified":"2017-01-06T19:01:10","modified_gmt":"2017-01-06T13:31:10","slug":"anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010","title":{"rendered":"Anney Aged 49 vs Emelda on 25 November, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Anney Aged 49 vs Emelda on 25 November, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 28191 of 2009(O)\n\n\n1. ANNEY AGED 49, W\/O. WILSON,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. EMELDA, AGED 52 YEARS,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.M.CHANDRAN\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.T.R.RAJAN\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID\n\n Dated :25\/11\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                        HARUN-UL-RASHID, J.\n                         ------------------------\n                     W.P.(C).No.28191 Of 2009\n                          ----------------------\n            Dated this the 25th day of November, 2010.\n\n                            J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
      The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:<\/p>\n
              i)     To call for the records relating to Exhibits<\/p>\n
         P1 to P5.\n<\/p>\n
              ii)    to issue appropriate writ or order and set<\/p>\n
         aside Ext.P4 order and Ext.P5 judgment passed by<\/p>\n
         the courts below.\n<\/p>\n
              iii)   To issue appropriate orders allowing all the<\/p>\n
         prayers sought for in Exts.P1 and P2 petitions filed by<\/p>\n
         the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
              iv)    To   stay   all   further   proceedings   in<\/p>\n
         E.P.No.259\/2008 in O.S.No.675\/2005 on the file of<\/p>\n
         the Principal Munsiff Court, Kollam.\n<\/p>\n
      2.    Petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.675 of 2005 on<\/p>\n
the file of the Principal Munsiff Court, Kollam. The respondent is<\/p>\n
the sister of the petitioner. Suit was filed by the respondent as<\/p>\n
plaintiff for eviction. The petitioner is admittedly residing in the<\/p>\n
house situated in the plaint schedule property. The petitioner<\/p>\n
entered appearance in the suit. During that time all the family<\/p>\n
members assembled together in the house of the petitioner in<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).No.28191 Of 2009<\/p>\n
                                ::2::\n<\/p>\n
connection with the death anniversary of the mother of the<\/p>\n
petitioner,  and    the relatives    wanted  the  petitioner    and<\/p>\n
respondent to settle the dispute between them. The petitioner<\/p>\n
alleges that the dispute between the parties was settled at the<\/p>\n
mediation of the relatives on that day. On that basis the plaintiff<\/p>\n
agreed to withdraw the suit whereby allowing the defendant to<\/p>\n
stay in the residential house situated in the plaint schedule<\/p>\n
property. It is further stated that believing the assurances and<\/p>\n
undertaking given by the plaintiff, the petitioner\/defendant did<\/p>\n
not thereafter appear in the suit. She also took the case file from<\/p>\n
the lawyer instructing the lawyer not to defend the suit in view of<\/p>\n
the settlement of the dispute.         It is also averred that<\/p>\n
subsequently, the petitioner came to know that the plaintiff did<\/p>\n
not withdraw the suit as agreed, but, prosecuted the suit and the<\/p>\n
suit is decreed ex-parte on 31.5.2006.      It is stated that the<\/p>\n
petitioner came to know about the ex-parte decree only when she<\/p>\n
received notice in the execution petition which was served to the<\/p>\n
petitioner on 22.11.2008. on getting information about the ex-<\/p>\n
parte decree the petitioner filed I.A.Nos.18 & 19 of 2009 seeking<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).No.28191 Of 2009<\/p>\n
                                ::3::\n<\/p>\n
to set aside the ex-parte decree and to condone the delay in filing<\/p>\n
the petition to set aside the ex-parte decree. Exts.P1 & P2 are<\/p>\n
the copies of the I.As.\n<\/p>\n
      3.    The respondent\/plaintiff seriously opposed the prayer.<\/p>\n
Respondent contended that the reasons stated for belated filing<\/p>\n
of the application for setting aside the ex-parte decree is not<\/p>\n
correct.   The respondent denied that there was no settlement<\/p>\n
arrived at between them. It is contented that the reasons stated<\/p>\n
is false, that there was no necessity for the lawyer of the<\/p>\n
defendant to relinguish vakalath in a case where there was an<\/p>\n
agreement to withdraw the suit.       The respondent vehemently<\/p>\n
opposed the application stating that the averments in the<\/p>\n
affidavit filed in support of the I.As are not true facts and the<\/p>\n
averments was inserted to suit the petitioner’s convenience.<\/p>\n
      4.    The learned Munsiff dismissed the I.As stating that<\/p>\n
absolutely no evidence was adduced to prove that there was an<\/p>\n
agreement entered into between the parties for withdrawal of the<\/p>\n
suit.  The court also observed that the reason shown in the<\/p>\n
petition is not sufficient or good reason to condone the delay<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).No.28191 Of 2009<\/p>\n
                               ::4::\n<\/p>\n
caused in the case. Both the applications were dismissed. The<\/p>\n
defendants preferred C.M.A.No.44 of 2009 challenging the order<\/p>\n
passed by the learned Munsiff.         The appellate court also<\/p>\n
disbelieved the case of the defendant that there was a settlement<\/p>\n
talk between the parties at the mediation of relatives and that<\/p>\n
the applications are filed belatedly only because she came to<\/p>\n
know about the passing of the ex-parte decree at the time when<\/p>\n
she received notice in the execution petition. Thus, both courts<\/p>\n
disbelieved the version of the defendant. Having failed to rely on<\/p>\n
the averments in the affidavit filed in support of the respective<\/p>\n
petition the courts held that the petitioner is not entitled to the<\/p>\n
relief sought for.\n<\/p>\n
      5.   Ext.P4 is the order passed by the learned Munsiff and<\/p>\n
Ext.P5 is the judgment passed by the learned District Judge. The<\/p>\n
dispute in this case is between two sisters. It is a family dispute.<\/p>\n
It is not known for what reasons the petitioner\/defendant did not<\/p>\n
continue to prosecute the suit. It is a fact that the suit was not<\/p>\n
contested and one sister got an ex-parte decree against the<\/p>\n
other.   I cannot re-appreciate the evidence on record in this<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).No.28191 Of 2009<\/p>\n
                                ::5::\n<\/p>\n
proceedings. It is a fact that suit was decided ex-parte. That<\/p>\n
means there was no consideration of the matter on merits.<\/p>\n
Taking a liberal view the courts below should have granted an<\/p>\n
opportunity to the petitioner to contest the case on terms. This<\/p>\n
is a case where the petitioner\/defendant is residing in the plaint<\/p>\n
schedule property. The suit was for eviction. Unless there is<\/p>\n
some compelling reasons, normally the petitioner\/defendant<\/p>\n
should have contested the suit. The reasons stated by her in the<\/p>\n
affidavit may be or may not be true. Since the suit itself is for<\/p>\n
eviction of the petitioner\/defendant from the residential house<\/p>\n
situated in the plaint schedule property, in the interest of justice,<\/p>\n
an opportunity shall be given to the petitioner\/defendant to<\/p>\n
contest the case on merits on payment of cost.<\/p>\n
      6.   Accordingly, I.A.Nos.18 & 19 of 2009 are allowed.<\/p>\n
Exts.P4 & P5 orders are set aside, on condition that the petitioner<\/p>\n
shall pay Rs.5,000\/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) as cost to the<\/p>\n
counsel for the respondent within a period of two weeks from<\/p>\n
today. If the cost ordered is not paid within the time fixed by<\/p>\n
this Court, the impugned orders shall stand confirmed. Since the<\/p>\n
W.P.(C).No.28191 Of 2009<\/p>\n
                                 ::6::\n<\/p>\n
suit is of the year 2005, there will be a further direction to the<\/p>\n
trial court to try and dispose of the suit on an early date, at any<\/p>\n
rate, within a period of nine months from the date of receipt of a<\/p>\n
copy of this judgment.       Parties shall appear before the court<\/p>\n
below on 15.12.2010.\n<\/p>\n
      The writ petition is disposed of as above.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                              HARUN-UL-RASHID,
\n                                                     Judge.\n<\/p>\n
bkn\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Anney Aged 49 vs Emelda on 25 November, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 28191 of 2009(O) 1. ANNEY AGED 49, W\/O. WILSON, … Petitioner Vs 1. EMELDA, AGED 52 YEARS, … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.T.M.CHANDRAN For Respondent :SRI.T.R.RAJAN The Hon’ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID Dated :25\/11\/2010 O R […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-63490","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAnney Aged 49 vs Emelda on 25 November, 2010 - 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\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Anney Aged 49 vs Emelda on 25 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-06T13:31:10+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\\\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Anney Aged 49 vs Emelda on 25 November, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-06T13:31:10+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1063,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010\",\"name\":\"Anney Aged 49 vs Emelda on 25 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-06T13:31:10+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Anney Aged 49 vs Emelda on 25 November, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Anney Aged 49 vs Emelda on 25 November, 2010 - 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\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Anney Aged 49 vs Emelda on 25 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-06T13:31:10+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\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Anney Aged 49 vs Emelda on 25 November, 2010","datePublished":"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-06T13:31:10+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010"},"wordCount":1063,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010","name":"Anney Aged 49 vs Emelda on 25 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-11-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-06T13:31:10+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/anney-aged-49-vs-emelda-on-25-november-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Anney Aged 49 vs Emelda on 25 November, 2010"}]},{"@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\/63490","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=63490"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63490\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=63490"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=63490"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=63490"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}