{"id":63865,"date":"2010-09-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010"},"modified":"2015-01-18T16:15:42","modified_gmt":"2015-01-18T10:45:42","slug":"p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"P.R.Sreedevi vs Smt.Suseela Alias Suleelamma on 30 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
P.R.Sreedevi vs Smt.Suseela Alias Suleelamma on 30 September, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nOP(C).No. 118 of 2010(O)\n\n\n1. P.R.SREEDEVI, W\/O.GANGADHARAN NAIR,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. GANGADHARAN, S\/O.KRISHNAN NAIR,\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. SMT.SUSEELA ALIAS SULEELAMMA,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :DR.V.N.SANKARJEE\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH\n\n Dated :30\/09\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                  THOMAS P JOSEPH, J.\n\n                 ----------------------------------------\n\n                     O.P(C).No.118 of 2010\n\n                  ---------------------------------------\n\n            Dated this 30th day of September, 2010\n\n                            JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
      This original petition is in challenge of Ext.P13, order<\/p>\n
refusing to set aside reports and plans submitted by the Advocate<\/p>\n
Commissioner and consequent dismissal of Ext.P11, application.<\/p>\n
Petitioners filed O.S.No.370 of 2001 in the court of learned<\/p>\n
Additional Munsiff, Cherthala for a decree for prohibitory<\/p>\n
injunction to restrain respondents from trespassing into the<\/p>\n
property described in that suit. Respondents in response filed<\/p>\n
O.S.No.475 of 2010 in the same court seeking a declaration of<\/p>\n
right and for prohibitory injunction. There is an order to try the<\/p>\n
suits jointly.   In both the suits, respective plaintiffs filed<\/p>\n
applications to appoint Surveyor and Commissioner to identify<\/p>\n
the properties and court appointed an Advocate Commissioner to<\/p>\n
inspect the properties with the assistance of Taluk Surveyor.<\/p>\n
Later, learned Munsiff removed the Taluk Surveyor and<\/p>\n
appointed    a   retired    Surveyor       to    assist  the Advocate<\/p>\n
Commissioner. After identification of properties by measurement<\/p>\n
as the Advocate Commissioner would say, Exts.P8 and P10<\/p>\n
reports along with plans are produced by the Advocate<\/p>\n
O.P(C).No.118 of 2010
\n                                : 2 :<\/span><\/p>\n
Commissioner. Then came Ext.P11, application by petitioner to<\/p>\n
set aside those reports and plans. Various allegations are made<\/p>\n
in Ext.P11, application including that the Advocate Commissioner<\/p>\n
has purposely helped the respondents who filed O.S.No.475 of<\/p>\n
2001.     Yet another objection is that there is no proper<\/p>\n
identification of the property and that even the plans submitted<\/p>\n
by Advocate Commissioner do not tally. Learned Munsiff found<\/p>\n
against the contentions and Ext.P11, application was dismissed<\/p>\n
by Ext.P13, order. Learned counsel asserts that Exts.P8 and P10,<\/p>\n
reports and plans are liable to be set aside or remitted to the<\/p>\n
Advocate Commissioner for fresh identification. Learned counsel<\/p>\n
has asserted the allegations in Ext.P11, application before me.<\/p>\n
      2.    I have gone through the records and Ext.P13, order.<\/p>\n
It is seen that learned Munsiff has referred to each objection<\/p>\n
raised by petitioners and found that the objections are not<\/p>\n
tenable.   There is reference to identification of properties as<\/p>\n
claimed by the parties with reference to the documents of title.<\/p>\n
One objection raised was that property belonging to one<\/p>\n
Makayiran Sasi (who is not a party to the proceeding) was not<\/p>\n
ascertained.      But the Advocate Commissioner reported that<\/p>\n
relevant documents were not furnished by the petitioners though,<\/p>\n
O.P(C).No.118 of 2010
\n                                : 3 :<\/span><\/p>\n
petitioners have a contention that it was actually applied.<\/p>\n
Learned Munsiff has observed that at any rate those documents<\/p>\n
are not produced in court (either along with Ext.P11 or before<\/p>\n
that). Learned Munsiff has also observed that petitioners have<\/p>\n
not examined the Advocate Commissioner or Surveyor in support<\/p>\n
of their contentions, the reports and plans are not accepted.<\/p>\n
Learned counsel states that the witness schedule was filed in the<\/p>\n
court but, that was not taken into account by the learned Munsiff.<\/p>\n
      3.    As I stated at the beginning, petitioners wanted a<\/p>\n
decree for prohibitory injunction in respect of the property<\/p>\n
scheduled in O.S.No.370 of 2001 obviously on the premise that<\/p>\n
they are in possession of the said property. In suits for injunction<\/p>\n
based on possession, detailed enquiry regarding title is not<\/p>\n
required and in cases involving complicated issues of title parties<\/p>\n
are to be relegated to a comprehensive suit on title. Petitioners<\/p>\n
have not sought any declaration of title or other relief based on<\/p>\n
title. They only sought a decree for prohibitory injunction based<\/p>\n
on their possession.   Report of the Advocate Commissioner is<\/p>\n
only an item of evidence. It is open to the petitioners to adduce<\/p>\n
evidence regarding possession of property as they claim in<\/p>\n
O.S.No.370 of 2001. So far as O.S.No.475 of 2001 is concerned,<\/p>\n
O.P(C).No.118 of 2010
\n                                : 4 :<\/span><\/p>\n
respondents who filed the suit have not come up with any<\/p>\n
contention that Exts.P8 and P10, reports and plans are not<\/p>\n
acceptable. Petitioners as defendants are resisting O.S.No.475 of<\/p>\n
2001.   In that case also there is no counter claim made by<\/p>\n
petitioners based on title claimed by them. In that situation, it is<\/p>\n
for the respondents who have filed O.S.No.475 of 2001 to show<\/p>\n
with acceptable plan that property described in O.S.No.475 of<\/p>\n
2001 is properly identified and that they have title over the said<\/p>\n
property as per documents of title. If there is any infirmity in the<\/p>\n
reports and plans in that regard it will only come to the<\/p>\n
disadvantage of respondents who filed O.S.No.475 of 2001. This<\/p>\n
court has also held in Sarojini Vs. Karthiyani Amma (2010(1)<\/p>\n
KLT SN 17 Case No.19) that interference with the reports and<\/p>\n
plans submitted by the Advocate Commissioner under Article 227<\/p>\n
of the Constitution is warranted only if it is shown that any order<\/p>\n
passed by the trial court as to whether the report has to be set<\/p>\n
aside or remitted suffered from such infirmity which if not<\/p>\n
corrected will result in grave injustice. I stated that so far as<\/p>\n
petitioners are concerned, their suit is only for decree for<\/p>\n
injunction based on possession which they can prove by<\/p>\n
appropriate evidence and that the infirmity in the report and plan<\/p>\n
O.P(C).No.118 of 2010
\n                                 : 5 :<\/span><\/p>\n
if any so far as property in O.S.No.475 of 2010 is concerned does<\/p>\n
not come into disadvantage of petitioners.     It is open to the<\/p>\n
petitioners to examine the Advocate Commissioner and Surveyor<\/p>\n
at the time of trial and show that respondents are not entitled to<\/p>\n
the declaration prayed for in O.S.No.475 of 2010.           In that<\/p>\n
situation I am not persuaded to think that there is any infirmity in<\/p>\n
the report and plan which is required to be interfered at this<\/p>\n
stage.\n<\/p>\n
      Original petition is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                              (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE)
\nSbna\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court P.R.Sreedevi vs Smt.Suseela Alias Suleelamma on 30 September, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM OP(C).No. 118 of 2010(O) 1. P.R.SREEDEVI, W\/O.GANGADHARAN NAIR, … Petitioner 2. GANGADHARAN, S\/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, Vs 1. SMT.SUSEELA ALIAS SULEELAMMA, … Respondent For Petitioner :DR.V.N.SANKARJEE For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon’ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH […]<\/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-63865","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nP.R.Sreedevi vs Smt.Suseela Alias Suleelamma on 30 September, 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\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"P.R.Sreedevi vs Smt.Suseela Alias Suleelamma on 30 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-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=\"2010-09-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-01-18T10:45:42+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"P.R.Sreedevi vs Smt.Suseela Alias Suleelamma on 30 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-01-18T10:45:42+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":956,\"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\\\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010\",\"name\":\"P.R.Sreedevi vs Smt.Suseela Alias Suleelamma on 30 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-01-18T10:45:42+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"P.R.Sreedevi vs Smt.Suseela Alias Suleelamma on 30 September, 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":"P.R.Sreedevi vs Smt.Suseela Alias Suleelamma on 30 September, 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\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"P.R.Sreedevi vs Smt.Suseela Alias Suleelamma on 30 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-01-18T10:45:42+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"P.R.Sreedevi vs Smt.Suseela Alias Suleelamma on 30 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-01-18T10:45:42+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010"},"wordCount":956,"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\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010","name":"P.R.Sreedevi vs Smt.Suseela Alias Suleelamma on 30 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-01-18T10:45:42+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-r-sreedevi-vs-smt-suseela-alias-suleelamma-on-30-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"P.R.Sreedevi vs Smt.Suseela Alias Suleelamma on 30 September, 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\/63865","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=63865"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63865\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=63865"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=63865"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=63865"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}