{"id":69846,"date":"2008-08-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008"},"modified":"2017-03-26T08:12:42","modified_gmt":"2017-03-26T02:42:42","slug":"vs-the-on-29-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"========================================== vs The on 29 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">========================================== vs The on 29 August, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Ks Jhaveri,&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\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nFA\/3357\/2005\t 5\/ 5\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nFIRST\nAPPEAL No. 3357 of 2005\n \n\n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI\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 the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n==========================================\n \n\nTHE\nNEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. \n\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSHRI\nDEVKARANBHAI VASANBHAI KERASIYA &amp; ANR   \n\n \n\n========================================== \nAppearance\n: \nMR KV GADHIA for Appellant:1 \nMR\nSANDEEP N BHATT for Defendant:1 \nNOTICE SERVED for\nDefendant:2 \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\tMR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 29\/08\/2008  \n \nORAL JUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>By<br \/>\n\tway of this appeal, the appellant has challenged judgment and award<br \/>\n\tdated 14.6.2005 passed by the learned Commissioner under Workmen&#8217;s<br \/>\n\tCompensation Act, Labour Court, Gandhidham-Kuchchh in  Workman<br \/>\n\tCompensation Application No.21 of 2002 whereby the learned<br \/>\n\tCommissioner, Gandhidham-Kuchchh has awarded Rs.4,54,968\/- with<br \/>\n\tinterest @ 9% from the date of accident till realization of amount<br \/>\n\tand order regarding cost of application, court fees was also made.<br \/>\n\tThe learned Commissioner, Gandhidham-Kuchchh also imposed amount of<br \/>\n\tRs.84,400\/- towards medical expenses.  The opponent no.2 herein was<br \/>\n\talso directed to pay Rs.10,000\/- as an amount of penalty.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tfacts in brief, as emerging from record, are as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>2.1      As per the<br \/>\ncase of the claimant, he was working as Driver with respondent No.2<br \/>\nat the salary of Rs.4000\/-  per month.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.2 \tOn 11.5.2002, when<br \/>\nhe was driving truck owned by opponent no.2 herein, he met with an<br \/>\naccident which caused serious injuries on his left and right legs and<br \/>\non different parts of body. He also received 40% permanent<br \/>\ndisability. He, thereafter, filed application for compensation for an<br \/>\namount of Rs.5,00,000\/- as compensation along with 18% interest on<br \/>\nthe amount of compensation and also 50% amount of penalty on account<br \/>\nof hardships caused to him during the course of employment before the<br \/>\nlearned Workmen Compensation Commissioner at Gandhidham-Kuchchh who<br \/>\nvide his judgment and award dated 14.6.2005 allowed the application<br \/>\nby awarding Rs.4,54,968\/- as compensation to the respondent No.1<br \/>\nherein along with interest on the said amount @ 9% from the date of<br \/>\naccident till the date of realization of amount and an amount of<br \/>\nRs.500\/- towards cost of an application, Rs.1000\/- towards court fee<br \/>\nstamp and Rs.84,000\/- towards medical expenses.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.4\tBeing aggrieved and<br \/>\ndissatisfied with the judgment and award passed by the learned<br \/>\nWorkmen Compensation Commissioner, Gandhidham-Kuchchh, the appellant<br \/>\nherein preferred the present appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>Heard<br \/>\n\tMr.K.V.Gadhia, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant-New<br \/>\n\tIndia Assurance Company Ltd. He has submitted that the amount<br \/>\n\tawarded by the learned Workmen Compensation Commissioner,<br \/>\n\tGandhidham-Kuchchh has not been rightly awarded as there is a clause<br \/>\n\tin the insurance policy which provides that in case of accident,<br \/>\n\tinsurance company is liable to pay compensation amount only under<br \/>\n\tthe Workmen&#8217;s Compensation Act, 1923 but not the interest. He has<br \/>\n\talso submitted that there is no statutory liability under the<br \/>\n\tWorkmen&#8217;s Compensation Act, 1923 on the insurance company. He has<br \/>\n\tfurther submitted that it is a matter of contract between the<br \/>\n\tinsurance company and the insured and it is always open to the<br \/>\n\tinsurance company to refuse to insured. The insurance company is<br \/>\n\talso entitled to provide the terms in the contract that the<br \/>\n\tinsurance company will not be liable to pay the interest. Relying<br \/>\n\tupon the decision of the Apex Court rendered in S.L.P. (Civil)<br \/>\n\tNo.341 of 2003 in case of P.J.Narayan Vs. Union of<br \/>\n\tIndia and Ors., Mr.Parikh submitted that in absence of any<br \/>\n\tstatute to this effect the insurance company cannot be forced by the<br \/>\n\tCourt to take the liability which is not contemplated under the<br \/>\n\tpolicy. The learned Advocate for the appellant has also relied upon<br \/>\n\tthe decision of the Hon&#8217;ble the Supreme Court reported in AIR<br \/>\n\tSC Weekly Vol.3, 2006, 2353 in<br \/>\n\tcase of New India Assurance Co.Ltd. v.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tHarshadbhai Amrutbhai Modhiya, wherein<br \/>\n\t the Hon&#8217;ble the Supreme Court has held that the Insurance Company<br \/>\n\tis not liable for the interest. The Hon&#8217;ble the Supreme Court, in<br \/>\n\tthe given case, construing the contract involved, held that the<br \/>\n\tinsurer has specifically excluded any liability for interest or<br \/>\n\tpenalty under the Workmen&#8217;s Compensation Act and confined the<br \/>\n\tliability to indemnify the employer only against the amount of<br \/>\n\tcompensation to be paid under the Workmen&#8217;s Compensation Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tlearned Advocate for the respondent No.1 has submitted that the<br \/>\n\tlearned Workmen Compensation Commissioner, Gandhidham-Kuchchh, has<br \/>\n\trightly awarded the compensation amount with interest by considering<br \/>\n\tthe medical certificate showing permanent disability caused to him<br \/>\n\tand other medical certificates produced by the respondent No.1 and<br \/>\n\tthe salary which was being paid to the respondent No.1. The learned<br \/>\n\tAdvocate has further submitted that the learned Commissioner,<br \/>\n\tGandhidham-Kuchchh, relying upon settled legal proposition of law,<br \/>\n\thas rightly come to the conclusion that in default of making payment<br \/>\n\tof compensation within a month by the employer, under the Workmen&#8217;s<br \/>\n\tCompensation Act, the insurance company is also liable to pay<br \/>\n\tcompensation amount and the interest thereon. The learned Advocate<br \/>\n\thas submitted that the respondent No.1 herein has produced all<br \/>\n\tnecessary documentary evidences in support of claim for amount of<br \/>\n\tcompensation relying on which the learned Commissioner,<br \/>\n\tGandhidham-Kuchchh has rightly awarded the compensation and the<br \/>\n\tinterest thereon.\n<\/p>\n<p>I<br \/>\n\thave considered the submissions made by learned advocates for both<br \/>\n\tthe sides. I have also gone through the documents on record and<br \/>\n\timpugned judgment of the Commissioner as well as decisions cited by<br \/>\n\tlearned advocate for the appellant. Looking to the settled legal<br \/>\n\tposition of law as held by the Hon&#8217;ble the Supreme Court in case of<br \/>\n\tNew India Assurance Co.Ltd. v. Harshadbhai Amrutbhai Modhiya<br \/>\n\t(supra),<br \/>\n\tthe Court is of the opinion that the Insurance Company is not<br \/>\n\trequired to make payment towards interest on compensation amount.<br \/>\n\tThe Court is in complete agreement with the submissions of the<br \/>\n\tlearned Advocate appearing for Insurance Company. Therefore, order<br \/>\n\timpugned herein is required to be modified accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>With<br \/>\n\tthe above observations, appeal is partly allowed. The appellant<br \/>\n\therein will not be required to make any payment towards interest<br \/>\n\texcept the principal amount to the claimant. It will be open for the<br \/>\n\tclaimant to recover the interest amount from the employer. The<br \/>\n\tinterest amount on the amount of compensation, if deposited by the<br \/>\n\tInsurance Company, is not allowed to be withdrawn by the claimant,<br \/>\n\tbut if the same is withdrawn, FDR will be given to the Bank and it<br \/>\n\twill be open for the claimant to recover the interest amount from<br \/>\n\tthe employer.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tappeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>(K.S.JHAVERI,<br \/>\nJ.)<\/p>\n<p>Amit\/-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court ========================================== vs The on 29 August, 2008 Author: Ks Jhaveri,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print FA\/3357\/2005 5\/ 5 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 3357 of 2005 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ========================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be [&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-69846","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 v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>========================================== vs The on 29 August, 2008 - 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\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"========================================== vs The on 29 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-08-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-03-26T02:42:42+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=\"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\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"========================================== vs The on 29 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-26T02:42:42+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1016,\"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\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008\",\"name\":\"========================================== vs The on 29 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-26T02:42:42+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"========================================== vs The on 29 August, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"========================================== vs The on 29 August, 2008 - 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\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"========================================== vs The on 29 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-03-26T02:42:42+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"========================================== vs The on 29 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-26T02:42:42+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008"},"wordCount":1016,"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\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008","name":"========================================== vs The on 29 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-26T02:42:42+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-the-on-29-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"========================================== vs The on 29 August, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/69846","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=69846"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69846\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69846"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69846"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69846"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}