{"id":68445,"date":"2010-04-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010"},"modified":"2018-04-06T21:49:25","modified_gmt":"2018-04-06T16:19:25","slug":"ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010","title":{"rendered":"M\/S vs Unknown on 9 April, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M\/S vs Unknown on 9 April, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: D.A.Mehta,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Ms.Justice H.N.Devani,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nTAXAPO\/1191\/2009\t 10\/ 10\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nTAX\nAPPEAL No.1191 of 2009\n \n\n===================================================\n \n\nM\/S.\nSHALIBHADRA AGENCIES - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=================================================== \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nTANVISH BHATT for M\/S\nWADIA GHANDY &amp; CO for Appellant(s) : 1, \nNone for Opponent(s) :\n1, \n===================================================\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t:\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n            and\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n\nDate\n: 09\/04\/2010 \n\n \n\n\n ORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI)<\/p>\n<p>\tThe<br \/>\n\tappellant, a proprietary concern, holding Sales Tax registration<br \/>\n\tunder the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 (the Act) as well as the<br \/>\n\tCentral Sales Tax Act, 1959, has challenged order dated 17.12.2008<br \/>\n\tmade by the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal, Ahmedabad (the<br \/>\n\tTribunal) proposing the following question, stated to be a<br \/>\n\tsubstantial question of law:\n<\/p>\n<p> Whether<br \/>\non the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate<br \/>\nTribunal was right in law in holding that products sold by the<br \/>\nAppellant viz. Swad Awla<br \/>\nand Swad Khajoor would not fall within Entry no.94 relating to<br \/>\nmedicines and would fall under Entry No.195 of Schedule II A of the<br \/>\nGujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969?\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe<br \/>\n\tappellant is a sole proprietary concern engaged in the business of<br \/>\n\ttrading of ayurvedic drugs. The appellant also sells products called<br \/>\n\tSwad Awla and Swad Khajoor as an agent of  Penjon India Ltd. ,<br \/>\n\twhich, according to the appellant, are ayurvedic medicines. The<br \/>\n\tappellant has also obtained licence from the Food and Drug Control<br \/>\n\tAuthorities. For the period 01.01.1992 to 31.03.1002, the Sales Tax<br \/>\n\tOfficer, Ahmedabad, vide order dated 23.04.1997 framed assessment<br \/>\n\tunder section 41(3) of the Act holding that the products sold by the<br \/>\n\tappellant are not Ayurvedic medicines and would fall under the<br \/>\n\tresiduary Entry 195 of Schedule-II A of the Act. The appellant<br \/>\n\tcarried the matter in appeal before the Assistant Commissioner of<br \/>\n\tSales Tax (the first appellate authority) who, vide order dated<br \/>\n\t26.02.2001, dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order of the<br \/>\n\tSales Tax Officer. The appellant carried the matter in second appeal<br \/>\n\tbefore the Tribunal, which came to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tMr.Tanvish<br \/>\n\tBhatt, learned advocate has assailed the impugned order of the<br \/>\n\tTribunal submitting that the essential character of the medicines in<br \/>\n\tquestion and its primary function are derived from the active<br \/>\n\tingredients contained therein. It is further submitted that Awla and<br \/>\n\tKhajoor are predominantly the main ingredients of the products and<br \/>\n\tthat Awla and Khajoor are recognized as ayurvedic products by<br \/>\n\tauthentic ayurvedic books like  Bhavprakash Nighantu . It is<br \/>\n\tsubmitted that the products sold by the appellant are very useful in<br \/>\n\tdigestion and are at times even prescribed by medical practitioners<br \/>\n\tto patients ailing from digestive problems. It is submitted that the<br \/>\n\tproducts in question have been manufactured on a scientific formula<br \/>\n\tbased on ayurvedic principles and that the combination of the<br \/>\n\tingredients of the products in question are based upon an ayurvedic<br \/>\n\ttext book titled &#8216;Bhavprakash Nighantu  and that the prescribed<br \/>\n\tdose is indicated on the product itself. It is further submitted<br \/>\n\tthat the products in question would directly fall within the ambit<br \/>\n\tof Entry 94 of Schedule-IIA of the Act; hence it was not permissible<br \/>\n\tfor the authorities to classify the said products under residuary<br \/>\n\tEntry 195.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tNext is<br \/>\n\tits submitted that the Tribunal has overlooked the certificate<br \/>\n\tissued by the Food and Drug Control Authorities which inter alia<br \/>\n\tprovides that the products of the appellant are ayurvedic medicines<br \/>\n\tand has failed to appreciate that the certificate issued by Food and<br \/>\n\tDrug Control administration authorities is conclusive evidence for<br \/>\n\tclassifying the products as ayurvedic medicines. In support of his<br \/>\n\tsubmissions, learned advocate has placed reliance upon a decision of<br \/>\n\tthe Madhya Pradesh High Court in Panama Chemical Works and Anr.<br \/>\n\tVs. Commissioner, Sales Tax, [2000] 120 STC 64 (M.P.)<\/p>\n<p>\tFrom the<br \/>\n\tfacts noted hereinabove, it is apparent that the dispute involved in<br \/>\n\tthe present case is a classification dispute as to whether the<br \/>\n\tproducts sold by the appellant viz. Swad Awla and Swad Khajoor are<br \/>\n\tayurvedic medicines so as to fall within the purview of Entry 94 of<br \/>\n\tSchedule IIA of the Act viz. drugs and medicines (other than those<br \/>\n\tspecified in Entry 92 in Schedule I and Entry 153 in the said<br \/>\n\tSchedule) or whether the same would fall under residuary Entry 195.<br \/>\n\tA perusal of the impugned order of the Tribunal shows that as<br \/>\n\tregards obtaining licence from Food and Drugs Control<br \/>\n\tAdministration, the Tribunal was of the view that simply because a<br \/>\n\tdealer obtains licence from the said authorities does not mean that<br \/>\n\tthe products sold by the dealer are medicines. On merits the<br \/>\n\tTribunal, has recorded that the appellant had produced some material<br \/>\n\tfrom certain books to show the medicinal value of Awla and Khajoor.<br \/>\n\tThe Tribunal has then noted that the appellant does not sell Awla as<br \/>\n\tAwla and Khajoor as Khajoor and that both the products have<br \/>\n\tundergone some process whereby other ingredients have been added to<br \/>\n\tAwla and Khajoor which may be of some medicinal value, but are not<br \/>\n\tsufficient to call the products medicines. The Tribunal has further<br \/>\n\trecorded that except for the carton and packing the appellant has<br \/>\n\tnot produced any material to suggest that the products in question<br \/>\n\tcontain certain other ingredients like Kala Namak, Kali Mirch,<br \/>\n\tSendha Namak, Elaichi, Jeera, Sugar, Ajwan, Nimbu ka Amrat, etc. The<br \/>\n\tTribunal has found that there is no authentic opinion to suggest<br \/>\n\tthat the above ingredients are required to be added in Awla and<br \/>\n\tKhajoor in the preparation of the products in question; that there<br \/>\n\tis no scientific data produced on record to suggest that the above<br \/>\n\tingredients have actually been added in the preparation as suggested<br \/>\n\tby some authentic materials or by experts. The Tribunal was of the<br \/>\n\topinion that the ingredients added to Awla and Khajoor may have some<br \/>\n\tmedicinal value, however, that by itself would not make the products<br \/>\n\tin question Ayurvedic medicines. Before a product can be considered<br \/>\n\tto be a medicine, there must be scientific proof that the said<br \/>\n\tproduct contains Ayurvedic or other medicines. According to the<br \/>\n\tTribunal several foods like milk, fruits, onions and garlic etc. may<br \/>\n\thave some medicinal value, however that by itself does not mean that<br \/>\n\tthey are to be considered as ayurvedic medicines. The Tribunal was<br \/>\n\tof the view that before a product can be considered as a medicine<br \/>\n\tthere must be some scientific proof that the said product contains<br \/>\n\tayurvedic or other medicines. On facts the Tribunal found that the<br \/>\n\tappellants have not shown as to how the appellant has fixed the<br \/>\n\tproportions of different ingredients in the ultimate products viz.<br \/>\n\tSwad Awla and Swad Khajoor and has held that if the products have<br \/>\n\tnot been manufactured in accordance with some scientific formula<br \/>\n\tthen such products cannot be accepted as ayurvedic medicines. The<br \/>\n\tTribunal has also referred to the proportions of the ingredients<br \/>\n\tused in the manufacture of the products in question and has found<br \/>\n\tthat there is no material on record to suggest that the said<br \/>\n\tproportions are drawn from some authoritative ayurvedic  books.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tFrom the<br \/>\n\tfindings of fact recorded by the Tribunal after appreciation of the<br \/>\n\tevidence on record, it is apparent that there is no material on<br \/>\n\trecord to indicate that the ingredients used in the manufacture of<br \/>\n\tSwad Awla and Swad Khajoor find mention in the authoritative text<br \/>\n\tbooks of Ayurveda. There is also nothing to show that the proportion<br \/>\n\tof the ingredients used in manufacture of the products in question<br \/>\n\tis based upon any scientific formula or that the products in<br \/>\n\tquestion are in fact considered to be ayurvedic medicines. The<br \/>\n\tTribunal was, therefore, justified in holding that merely because<br \/>\n\tthere are some medicinal qualities in the product in question, which<br \/>\n\teven otherwise may be found in several food articles, is no reason<br \/>\n\tto hold that the products in question are ayurvedic medicines. The<br \/>\n\tdecision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Panama Chemical<br \/>\n\tWorks and Anr. (supra), on which reliance has been placed by<br \/>\n\tthe learned advocate for the appellant, does not carry the case of<br \/>\n\tthe appellant any further inasmuch as the said decision does not lay<br \/>\n\tdown any proposition of law. The Court has merely recorded that the<br \/>\n\tquestion as to whether the tablet manufactured and sold in the<br \/>\n\tmarket under the name  Swad  would be confectionery or any<br \/>\n\tayurvedic medicine, has to some extent been already decided by a<br \/>\n\tDivision Bench of that Court in the matter of <a href=\"\/doc\/723198\/\">Panama Chemical Works<br \/>\n\tv. Union of India<\/a>; and has thereafter remanded the matter for<br \/>\n\tdeciding the question afresh in the light of the said decision.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn the<br \/>\n\tlight of fact that the conclusions arrived at by the Tribunal are<br \/>\n\tbased upon findings of fact recorded after appreciation of the<br \/>\n\tevidence on record, it cannot be stated that the impugned order of<br \/>\n\tthe Tribunal suffers from any legal infirmity so as to warrant<br \/>\n\tinterference.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tabsence of any question of law, much less any substantial question<br \/>\n\tof law, the appeal is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n<p>[D. A.\n<\/p>\n<p>MEHTA, J]<\/p>\n<p>Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n<p>[<br \/>\nH.N.DEVANI, J]<\/p>\n<p>***<\/p>\n<p>Bhavesh*<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court M\/S vs Unknown on 9 April, 2010 Author: D.A.Mehta,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Ms.Justice H.N.Devani,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print TAXAPO\/1191\/2009 10\/ 10 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL No.1191 of 2009 =================================================== M\/S. SHALIBHADRA AGENCIES &#8211; Appellant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT &#8211; Opponent(s) =================================================== Appearance : MR TANVISH [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-68445","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>M\/S vs Unknown on 9 April, 2010 - 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\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S vs Unknown on 9 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-04-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-04-06T16:19:25+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=\"8 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-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S vs Unknown on 9 April, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-06T16:19:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1450,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S vs Unknown on 9 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-06T16:19:25+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S vs Unknown on 9 April, 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":"M\/S vs Unknown on 9 April, 2010 - 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\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S vs Unknown on 9 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-04-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-04-06T16:19:25+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S vs Unknown on 9 April, 2010","datePublished":"2010-04-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-06T16:19:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010"},"wordCount":1450,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010","name":"M\/S vs Unknown on 9 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-04-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-06T16:19:25+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-vs-unknown-on-9-april-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S vs Unknown on 9 April, 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\/68445","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=68445"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68445\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68445"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68445"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68445"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}