{"id":68774,"date":"2008-09-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008"},"modified":"2018-05-11T22:44:19","modified_gmt":"2018-05-11T17:14:19","slug":"kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"Kamuben vs Bhupendra on 16 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Kamuben vs Bhupendra on 16 September, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: R.M.Doshit,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice D.Dave,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   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\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nLPA\/755\/2005\t 8\/ 8\tJUDGMENT \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nLETTERS\nPATENT APPEAL No. 755 of 2005\n \n\nIn\n\n\n \n\nMISC.\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 1637 of 2004\n \n\nIn\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 228 of 1996\n \n\nAnd\n\n\n \n\nCIVIL\nAPPLICATION No. 4895 of 2005\n \n\nIn\n \n\n\nLETTERS\nPATENT APPEAL No. 755 of 2005\n \n\nWith\n \n\nLETTERS\nPATENT APPEAL No. 756 of 2005\n \n\nIn\n \n\n\nMISC. CIVIL\nAPPLICATION No. 1637 of 2004\n \n\nin\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 4896 of 2005\n \n\nAnd\n \n\nCIVIL\nAPPLICATION No. 4896 of 2005\n \n\nin\n \n\nLETTERS\nPATENT APPEAL No. 756 of 2005\n \n\nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \nHONOURABLE\nMS. JUSTICE R.M.DOSHIT  \n&\n \n\nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE SHARAD D.DAVE\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo\n\t\t\tbe referred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n=========================================================\n\n \n\nKAMUBEN\nJAYANTIBHAI PATEL & 4 - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nBHUPENDRA\nCHAGANLAL GANDHI & 16 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: {Letters  Patent Appeal No. 755 of 2005 & Civil Application No.\n4895 of 2005} \nMR\nAS VAKIL for Appellants \nMR UTPAL M PANCHAL for Respondent(s) : 1 -\n5. \nMS ARCHANA RAVAL  AGP for Respondent no. 6 \n\n \n\nDELETED\nfor Respondent(s) : 7, 9, \nNONE  for Respondent(s) : 8, 10 ?  11, \n  13-17                                                              \n            \nMR MIHIR THAKORE, Sr Advocate with MR AMAR N BHATT for\nRespondent(s) : 12,\n \n\nAppearance\n: {Letters  Patent Appeal No. 756  of 2005 & Civil Application\nNo. 4896  of 2005} \nMR\nMIHIR THAKORE,  Sr Advocate  with Mr Amar N. Bhatt  for Appellants \nMR\nUTPAL M PANCHAL for Respondent(s) : 1- 5. \nNone for Respondents\nNos. 3.2.1                                                           \n                                                  MS ARCHANA RAVAL \nAGP for Respondent No. 6                                             \n                                      DELETED for Respondents No. 7,\n10, 12                                                               \n                                  MR AS VAKIL for Respondent nos.  8,\n13 to 16  \nRULE  Served ::   Respondent(s) :  9, 11, 17 - \n21 \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\n \n \n\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\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMS. JUSTICE R.M.DOSHIT\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n HONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE SHARAD D.DAVE   16th September, 2008\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n ORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n
 (Per
\n: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.M.DOSHIT)<\/p>\n
Learned advocate Mr. A.S
\nVakil has appeared for the appellants in Letters Patent Appeal No.
\n755 of 2005. He has submitted that since the decision in the writ
\npetition, the respondent no. 11 has passed away. He, therefore,
\nseeks leave to delete the name of the respondent no.11\/opponent no.
\n11 from the cause-title of the Letters  Patent Appeal No. 755 of 2005
\nand Civil Application No. 4895 of 2005. Leave is granted. Name of the
\nRespondent no. 11\/opponent No. 11 from the cause-title of the Appeal
\nand Civil Application be deleted.\n<\/p>\n
\t These
\ntwo Appeals, preferred under clause 15 of the Letters Patent, arise
\nfrom the judgment and order dated 10th March, 2005 passed
\nby the learned Single Judge in above Misc. Civil Application No. 1637
\nof 2004.\n<\/p>\n
\t The
\nappellants in Letters Patent Appeal No. 755 of 2005 are the original
\nowners of the land bearing Plot no. 32  of village-Adajan,
\nDistrict-Surat. The appellants in Letters Patent Appeal No. 756 of
\n2005 have purchased  the said land in the year 2002 from its owners.
\nThey are  the successors-in-title of the appellants in Appeal No. 755
\nof 2005. In the proceedings held under the Urban Land [Ceiling &
\nRegulation] Act, 1976, the said land was, by  order made by the
\ncompetent authority, declared to be ?Sexcess vacant land??.
\nThe said order of the competent authority was set-aside in appeal, by
\nthe Urban Land Tribunal, Ahmedabad. The order of the Urban Land
\nTribunal was challenged by the State Government in above Special
\nCivil Application No. 228 of 1996. On 6th February, 1996,
\nthe following Order came to be made on the said petition :-\n<\/p>\n
?SRule.\n<\/p>\n
Ad-interim relief in terms of para 11 [B] is granted on the condition
\nthat the land declared surplus may not be disposed of by the
\npetitioner in any manner.??\n<\/p>\n
In view of
\nthe Repeal of the above Act of 1976 by the Urban Land [Ceiling &
\nRegulation] Repeal Act, 1999, the petition came to be disposed of
\nby Order dated 20th July, 1999. The said order has become
\nfinal. During the pendency of the aforesaid petition, in the year
\n1998, the respondents no. 1 to 5 ?  the applicants in Misc. Civil
\nApplication – purchased the said land allegedly from the constituted
\nattorney of the owners -the appellants in Letters Patent
\nAppeal No. 755 of 2006. The above referred transfers, one in favour
\nof the respondents no. 1 to 5 and the other in favour of the
\nappellants in Appeal No. 756 of 2005 are subject matter of dispute in
\nSpecial Civil Suits No. 180 of 2004 and 194 of 2004 pending before
\nthe Civil Court at Surat.\n<\/p>\n
\t  Pending
\nthe said suits, the respondents nos. 1 to 5 took out above Misc.
\nCivil Application for review\/clarification of the above referred
\norder dated 6th February, 1996. While disposing of the
\nMisc. Civil Application, by impugned Order dated 10th
\nMarch, 2005, the learned Single Judge has observed that, ?S..It
\nappears that the earlier interim order dated 6.2.1996 has finally
\nmerged with the final order dated 2.7.1999 passed by this court
\nwhereby the Rule is discharged and the interim relief is vacated and,
\ntherefore, when the interim order is vacated when final order is
\npassed in the main Special Civil Application, naturally the interim
\norder dated 6.2.1996 cannot be said to be, in any manner, prejudicial
\nto the rights of any parties to the proceedings. If the petitioner
\nhas purchased the property by registered Sales Deed on 4.5.1998, then
\nsubject to the contentions of the client of Mr. Vakil as well as Mr.
\nBhatt, it cannot be said that the interim order shall be, adversely
\naffected the rights of the applicant on the basis of the so-called
\nSale Deed dated 4.5.1998. It deserves to be recorded that merely
\nbecause application is made, it cannot be said that this Court has
\nexpressed view on the legality and validity of the Sale Deed dated
\n4.5.1998, which otherwise may be a subject matter for scrutiny in the
\nproceedings of Special Civil Suit No. 180\/2004 and No. 194\/2004 and
\nalso in the relevant proceedings arising in respect to the revenue
\nentry under the Bombay Land Revenue Code. Suffice it to say, it would
\nbe open to both the parties to raise all contentions as may  be
\navailable in accordance with law, except that the order dated
\n6.2.1996 passed in Special Civil Application No. 228 of 1996 shall
\nnot be construed in the manner for putting any embargo over the
\nrights of either side.??  It is this observation which has
\naggrieved the appellants before us.\n<\/p>\n
\t Mr.\n<\/p>\n
Thakore and Mr. Vakil have appeared for the appellants. In the
\nsubmission of Mr. Thakore and Mr. Vakil, the above referred
\nobservation made by the learned Single Judge is unwarranted and is
\nmade without jurisdiction. They have submitted that the application
\nmade by the respondents nos. 1 to 5 ?  non-party to the writ
\npetition was not maintainable. In any view of the matter, the interim
\norder made on 2nd February, 1996 was clear and
\nunambiguous. The said order did not call for clarification.
\nWhat should be the effect of the said order on the purchase made by
\nthe respondents no. 1 to 5 is the subject matter of proceedings
\npending before the Civil Court. The above referred observation made
\nby the learned Single Judge will preempt the defense of the
\nappellants before the Civil Court.\n<\/p>\n
Mr. Panchal has appeared for the respondents nos. 1 to 5.  He
\nhas contested the appeals. At the outset, Mr. Panchal has questioned
\nthe maintainability of the present Appeal. He has submitted that
\nagainst the order made in a petition filed under Article 227 of the
\nConstitution, an appeal under Letters Patent does not lie. In support
\nthereof, he has relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
\nin the matter of Sushilbhai Laxminarayan Mudliyar & Ors.
\nvs. Nihalchand Waghajibhai Shaha & Ors.<\/a> [1993 Suppl. (1)
\nSCC 11] & of Kishorilal v. Sales Officer, District Land
\nDevelopment Bank & Ors. [2006 (7) SCC 496]. As against
\nthat, Mr. Thakore has relied upon the judgment in the matter of
\nDilawarsinh Khodubha v. State of Gujarat & Anr.<\/a>
\n[1994 (2) GLH 1]. In  both these judgments, the Hon’ble
\nSupreme Court has reiterated the well-settled law that when a
\npetition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the
\nConstitution, the Letters Patent Appeal would be maintainable.   Same
\nis the view expressed by the Full Bench of this Court in the matter
\nof Dilawarsinh Khodubha v. State of Gujarat & Anr.<\/a>
\n[Supra]. Besides, these Appeals arise from the order made on
\napplication for review. An appeal against the order allowing the
\nreview is maintainable under Order XLVII Rule 7 CPC. We are,
\ntherefore, of the opinion that these Appeals against the impugned
\norder dated 10th March, 2005 made on application for
\nreview are maintainable.\n<\/p>\n
Mr. Panchal has submitted that the aforesaid interim
\nrelief has prejudiced the rights of the respondents nos. 1 to
\n5 created by the aforesaid sale. The respondents, therefore, were
\ncompelled to seek clarification. The clarification made by the
\nlearned Single Judge does not in any manner prejudice the
\nrights of the parties before the  Civil Court.\n<\/p>\n
\t  We
\nare unable to agree with Mr. Panchal. We do agree with Mr. Thakore
\nand Mr. Vakil that the above referred observation shall prejudice
\nand adversely affect the rights and contentions of the appellants
\nbefore the Civil Court. Besides, the order dated 6th
\nFebruary, 1996 is clear and unambiguous. No clarification was
\nwarranted. Moreover, the respondents nos. 1 to 5 not being party to
\nthe writ petitions, had no locus to seek clarification
\nof the interim order dated 2nd February, 1996. The
\napplication was made without seeking permission to file such
\napplication. Nor did the applicant seek condonation of delay though
\nthe application was ex facie time barred. If the respondents
\nnos. 1 to 5 have purchased the land while interim relief was
\noperating, the legal consequences shall follow. Such legal
\nconsequences cannot be avoided or obliterated by seeking
\nclarification of the order.\n<\/p>\n
\t  For
\nthe aforesaid reasons, the Appeals are allowed. The impugned
\norder dated 10th March, 2005 passed by the learned Single
\nJudge is quashed and set-aside. Misc. Civil Application No.
\n1637 of 2004 is rejected. Civil Applications stand disposed
\nof.\n<\/p>\n
\t Registry
\nwill maintain copy of this order in each Appeal.\n<\/p>\n
{Miss R.M Doshit, J.}<\/p>\n
{Sharad D. Dave, J.}<\/p>\n
Prakash*<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Kamuben vs Bhupendra on 16 September, 2008 Author: R.M.Doshit,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice D.Dave,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print LPA\/755\/2005 8\/ 8 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 755 of 2005 In MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1637 of 2004 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 228 of […]<\/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-68774","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nKamuben vs Bhupendra on 16 September, 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\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kamuben vs Bhupendra on 16 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-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=\"2008-09-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-11T17:14:19+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\\\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kamuben vs Bhupendra on 16 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-11T17:14:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1345,\"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\\\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008\",\"name\":\"Kamuben vs Bhupendra on 16 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-11T17:14:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kamuben vs Bhupendra on 16 September, 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":"Kamuben vs Bhupendra on 16 September, 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\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kamuben vs Bhupendra on 16 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-11T17:14:19+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\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kamuben vs Bhupendra on 16 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-11T17:14:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008"},"wordCount":1345,"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\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008","name":"Kamuben vs Bhupendra on 16 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-11T17:14:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kamuben-vs-bhupendra-on-16-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kamuben vs Bhupendra on 16 September, 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\/68774","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=68774"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68774\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68774"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68774"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68774"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}