{"id":71359,"date":"2008-08-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008"},"modified":"2014-11-21T15:22:18","modified_gmt":"2014-11-21T09:52:18","slug":"afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"Afzal vs Smt Saroja on 7 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Afzal vs Smt Saroja on 7 August, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: B.S.Patil<\/div>\n
Ill ms HIGH COURT 0FmK.iR}iATAl\u20ac.A arr BAHGALORE\nmm\u00bb 1-ms THE 71! ms? or AUGUST, \nammas   \nmm Hoxrnm un..ms1-rm 1:.s.1\u00bb2i*-%\u00ab%':1:'1!e,iV'T%.1 \"   ~ ' A'\nM3Am.\u00ab16(  _: .    1 % \ufb01 A \nu.1r.A.xo.451._7_(2o\"c-3   \nS\/o hate Abdul Khadar,\n\nAged about38y\u00a2ars,     \nNational Mu\ufb02omand  \n\nD.No.10,Dr.RajLfum,3;*Road; \" ~ \n\nBangalore \u00ab'e$6at_>'\u00a7:)21;*    t    .. APPELLAIIT\n\n' (common)\n\n(By Sri. sanmsh \nfor M._I_3.  1~.i0lla;.Acivs.)\n\n-......n--7u-....-\n\n   A.  ..... \n\n   \n\na \" iJl\"'~'a'_t'~==--\n'  .ab\u00a21:i' 62 Years.\n'R]af: No.7, 1!! Cross,\nChimiappa Layout,\n\n\" V Eanwlorc ~---- 560 032.\n\nI: ' h\"\\.' '\n\n Sri Syed Abdul Rashced\n@ Pchlwan Babu,\nS\/o Sycd Abdul Ga\ufb02er,\n\n\n\nAged about 50 years, 2\n\nNo.68\/2, Bythul Manzil,\n\n133* 01053, Smyapuram, \nBangame -- 560 005. \n\n(By SriJaya1m1nar S.PatJ'l, Sr. Counsel for __ .. A  \nS:ri.G.Nandakumar Gr. V.J.Benjaznin, Advs. fo;_ 4.1)  '\n\nThese Misocllancous First    \n\n43 Rule 1(1') of cm, against the oxtiar-,1.' dated 03.01\non LA No.1 in O.S.No.17202\/$3004 ottthe \ufb01k:o5f.XIii'AddI.'t City\nCivil Judge, Bangalore, CC!-I~22,~..  VIA'  Imdcr\nOrder 39 Rules 1 as 2 CFC for TIL 2   --  \n\nThese Misoellanedtm First   been heard and\nreserved for orders,    this day, the\nCourt delivered the following;_-  1   \n\n \"\"\"    \n\n1. 'I'1:k -V' -- tivo  by the 1\" defendant against\n\nthe cA:om_ \"attic: dat\u00a3xi\u00b0U't\u00a7.D1.2008 passed on the appiications\n\n   well as the 1\" defendant under Oxder\n\n [piss 2 cpc, to restrain from interfering with the\n\n .  and enjoyment of the suit schndulc\n\n plainti\ufb01'\/1\" mspondent herein \ufb01led a suit in\n\n  -~.C;.S.No.17_202\/2004 secldng permanent injunction against the\n\n1\" defendant] appellant herein and raise one Syod Abdul\n\n-%\n\n\n\n_. 3 ._\nRasheed, the 2\"' de\ufb01endaut (294 respondent in these gppcab).<\/pre>\n
Along with the suit, the plain\ufb01ff \ufb01led an app1ieaEi<\u00a7iz..d_du;zder<\/p>\n
Order xxxzx Raises 1 56 2 cm seeking an oxx1cz\u00a5"\u00a7f"<\/p>\n
injunction. The court be-bw    <\/p>\n
order in \ufb02avour of the plainti\ufb01i   d\u00bb:i.ez'xdaiitV:'\ufb013eii,e_:en <\/p>\n
application under Curler ._
\nex-parte interim order, and
\nunder Order XXXIX   2  onieruof temporaxy
\ninjunction in respect o\u00a7e.m\u00a7_'  by him in the
\nwritten smtgmged    iijvpg\ufb01peiey bearing Khatha
\n   \u00a30.75 (on No.22\/2] at
\n  boundaries.\n<\/p>\n
3. _ The   both the applications filed by<\/p>\n
 1*’ defendant, and has aikrwed the<\/p>\n
    the plain\ufb01\ufb02 under Order XXXIX Ruies 1 Ge 2<\/p>\n
gm zi\ufb01nd g  elder of temporary injunction restrain’ mg’ the<\/p>\n
 \ufb01rom interfering with the pLainti\ufb01”s possession and<\/p>\n
A ‘efeejejrmcnt of the suit schedule property. The appiicamn \ufb01led<\/p>\n
‘   the 1″ defendant under Order XXXiX. Rules 1 & 2 has been<\/p>\n
‘4  In this background, the 1″ defendant has \ufb01led these<\/p>\n
.. 4 ..\n<\/p>\n
two appeals, one directed against the grant of temporary
\ninjunction in favour of the plainti\ufb01’ and the other directed
\nagainst the rejection of his application for grant of <\/p>\n
injunction. As both these appeals arise out of a <\/p>\n
passed, they are heard together and are <\/p>\n
common judgment.\n<\/p>\n
4. The facts involved in the,case_   i in n11_tsheH, <\/p>\n
the plaintiff Smt.C.Saroja
\ninjunction in respect of  property’  describing it
\nas 15 guntas of land  at   ra village,<\/p>\n
 Taluk, Bangalore, adjoining Sy.
\nNo.22 botintied .ji53;.G\u00b0”\u00b0rnment Halls, West by Built<\/p>\n
up ygtxtoperty ‘V of  North by Road, and South by<\/p>\n
 mi”tt%\u00e9m:[t:  . Wtshe contended that the suit schedule<\/p>\n
I   of the land granted to her father Late<\/p>\n
2  _   her father was issued with a saguvali chit dated<\/p>\n
A   He passed away in the year 1974. Thezeafter, the<\/p>\n
    her brothers and sisters continued in possession of the<\/p>\n
 land. Tote} extent ofthe land measured is 2 acres 29 guntas.<\/p>\n
.%<\/p>\n
.. 7 ..\n<\/p>\n
also asserted that his property was part of old Sy. No.22\/2 and
\nmeasured 50’x6{)’.  \u00bb_ _\n<\/p>\n
6. The 1*’ defendant on his part produced:-~.:1\u00a75.\u00a2d<\/p>\n
dated 07.07.1994 under which he <\/p>\n
60′ pnoperty comprised in   of I<\/p>\n
Kavalbyrasandra village. The__  fqr 2  <\/p>\n
bcttexmcnt charges was also  2<\/p>\n
7. The Trial Court   at’ the materials on<\/p>\n
record prime  fotfi\ufb01dv’  33\u00a2 hf the piain\ufb01\ufb01 Sri<\/p>\n
Chm” n;eifaj$a”    guntas of kharab Land<\/p>\n
mtjomm.’ 9 g   22\/ 1 otxavanayxasandm vn Lage<\/p>\n
as was    Order and the saguvali chit<\/p>\n
  .__It  that the saguvaii chit being a public<\/p>\n
 ‘  pmsumptivc value. On the other hand, though<\/p>\n
 that his property was \ufb01)rme.d out of Sy.<\/p>\n
 No.\u00e99..,   not produce any records to substantiate the<\/p>\n
   sale clwd. produced by him did not refer to Sy.<\/p>\n
IE32. In the circumstances, the Trial Court has found that the
\ns’<\/p>\n
-8-<\/span>
\nplainti\ufb01made outaprimafaciecaseandthe balsnoe of<\/p>\n
convenience. was in favour of grant of injuac\ufb01on to the <\/p>\n
8. Learned Counsel appearing for the *.<\/p>\n
contends that the court beiow fa1}ed’ __to   V cots ~ L4 <\/p>\n
produced by the 1″ defendant in its 7\/He<\/p>\n
submits that the vendor of “-1}’ <\/p>\n
was the owner in possession    No.2′.2]2
\nand the property in qI1est\u00a7onA’1″ defendant was
\npart of the said Iatld sy him under the
\nxegistemd      order passed by this
\nCourt   to contend that one
\nK.M. against the sister of the 1”\n<\/p>\n
  the relief of permanent injunction<\/p>\n
  tige de\ufb01andan\ufb02 ttttt H ts therein fmm inter\ufb01:nng’ or<\/p>\n
  possession and enjoyment of the<\/p>\n
2  _  The pmperty shown in the plaint schedule<\/p>\n
 the’. suit o.s.1~:o.1ees\/1990 was 6 guntas of land<\/p>\n
 in Sy. No.22\/’.2 (new Sy. No.75) situated at<\/p>\n
    Though the suit \ufb01led was dismissed, the<\/p>\n
 Regular First Appeal \ufb01led by K.M.I-iidayatllulia in RFA<\/p>\n
is<\/p>\n
.. 9 ..\n<\/p>\n
No.989\/2001 was allowed and the suit c.amc to be deexeed. On
\nthe basis of the said judment in the Regular First it is<\/p>\n
contended by the learned Catmsel for the \ufb01he<\/p>\n
sister of the 1″ respondent was  u\ufb02;1e ”<\/p>\n
judgment and decxee \ufb01nom interfering  -:<\/p>\n
1<.M. Hmayathuna rm pumhngcq gamut of
\nremaining lam: continued   Vendor of
\nthe plaintiff and in   nztentioned by
\nK. M.Hidayathul]a_,  V  shown as land<\/p>\n
belonging to    contends that as<\/p>\n
the If'  \ufb02\u00e9pmpcrty comprised in Sy.
\nNo.22\/ 2  .Mr'\u00a7n"':is,MV '3.'   which was later on assigned<\/p>\n
 Ne.'1.i.27]   measuring 50' x 60' on<\/p>\n
 '~  _  he  owner absolutely entitled for pmtec\ufb01mn<\/p>\n
  of   of the said property.\n<\/p>\n
9;   Counsel appearing for the respondent strongly<\/p>\n
   euppexiethe order passed by the trial’ Court.<\/p>\n
  I have heard the learned” Counsel for the perm” s and<\/p>\n
  perused the entire materials on record. The point that<\/p>\n
EH9 for oonsidcmmn is:\n<\/p>\n
…..}~0……\n<\/p>\n
‘Whether the order under appeal sz.g0′”e1s
\nillegality or perversity so as to warrant ifs…
\n(hub appeal? 4’ V  ‘<\/p>\n
11. The mlier sought by the 1″ i%csp\u00a7)1Lr.;\u00a3eii’i._\u00a3s~   “<\/p>\n
\n\nkhamb land which was  \nwhich was shown to     bearing Sy.\n<\/pre>\n
No.13, 14, 15, 16, 22  fgf Village. The
\ndocuments pmdliocd ‘:i:?e1sg$on<1ent prima facie
\ndisclose that    he was gzant\u00e9cl an
\n  land situated adjoining
\nthe   Thc revenue moortis<\/p>\n
  name of Chmna' ppa, as his name<\/p>\n
 wa.si\u00a21'v;t\u00e927ed  of rights in respect of the granted<\/p>\n
 \u00bbA    cntrixcs continued even after he passed away<\/p>\n
   till the: year 1995. Though the plainti\ufb01" chum" 3<\/p>\n
 partition between herself, her brothers and sisters,<\/p>\n
3    of 15 guntas of the suit schedule property has fallen<\/p>\n
.'   share which is adjoining the above mentioned survey<\/p>\n
  ""\ufb01umber, no material is 111% before the Court to ahow that<\/p>\n
after the partition the pmperty was assigned any number and<\/p>\n
g<\/p>\n
-11-<\/span>
\nthe same was entered in the name of the  The<\/p>\n
unnumbcmd land which was granted as part of  is<\/p>\n
not shown to have been assigned any t1uznbe_1f.– <\/p>\n
trial Court has placed stmng I’cIia.IJlQ\u00a2_01’1  etzeh <\/p>\n
as sagnvali chit and the revenue  _ tfda <\/p>\n
schedule property was granted  thtretlfof
\nplain\ufb01\ufb01 being the daughter of ~;’t.: :1)’ ap K   to own
\nand possess the land.   of tIH1eApLainti\ufb01’ with
\nthat of the defendant tn_    pmctuoett by<\/p>\n
the defendazft1:;_.:i’i: it  rightly found by the<\/p>\n
final’ Qbt1i’t.”  material to show that the
\n 127\/ 1 1 of Kavalbyrasandxa over<\/p>\n
which _    3 possessicm was part of Sy.<\/p>\n
 nit’ carved out of the said survey number.<\/p>\n
   07.07.1994 produced by the 1″ defendant<\/p>\n
tto\u00a7s’*t1ot’ti\u00e9t:;;td?t\u00a2 Sy. No.22\/2. Though the Counsel for the 1″<\/p>\n
 deti:’\ufb01\u00a3\u00a7,a;i1.t-eqxnpellaxlt hemin piaces considerable xeiiance on the<\/p>\n
 ~jt1dg.=1;e1ttrcnde1ed by this Court in RFA 530.989\/2001 disposed<\/p>\n
‘   tat: 25.01.2002, the saute does not help the appellant m as<\/p>\n
  ” h as the said judgment pertains to Sy. No.22\/2, new Sy.<\/p>\n
…  ..\n<\/p>\n
No.75 of Kavalhyrasandm measuring 6 guntas. There is no link
\nestablished by the appellant to show that his property was part
\nof Sy. No.22\/2, new Sy. No.75. Even in that sale dr\ufb01ddated<\/p>\n
07.07.1994, the schedule of the property and <\/p>\n
shown do not indicate the existence of  <\/p>\n
any side. At any rate. tm .ilxtigmc..Vj;1tma1Ju.”””‘ .,deexeee.At\u00a7i’.  ‘Int;  AV<\/p>\n
injunction granted in favour of I-Inlay’ tt:aat\u00a7ttuBat.’\u00a7:a_v.1Ad\u00bb.agz\u00a7itis~t:V’the
\nsister of the p}.ainti\ufb01’ – 1″  t1ezein.   puma’
\nman taken to draw  ts’ interest of<\/p>\n
the plajnti\ufb02”. However,   by the trial’
\nCourt.    of trial that the case put<\/p>\n
 15%   come to light. Thezcfoxe in my<\/p>\n
view,    iajunc\ufb01an in favour of the<\/p>\n
 ‘~  _    any illcgaiity or pexversity.<\/p>\n
    the 1″ defendanth\/appellant’s case is also<\/p>\n
  sak: deed and his assertion is that the<\/p>\n
 by him is part of Sy. No.22,\/2. As the 1″<\/p>\n
  “:t:V'{}e:fe\u00a3t\u00a77iant has rinsed’ the dispute rcgardm’ g the identity and<\/p>\n
  lecation ofthe phintifs pmperty, keeping in mind the facts and<\/p>\n
  nsta11ces ofthe case, I am of the View that though the 1”<\/p>\n
-14..\n<\/p>\n
is d1mcted’ to expedite the disposal ofthc suit and make an <\/p>\n
cndcavour to dispose of the same within a period of  <\/p>\n
months 110132 the date of receipt of the copy of     \u00e9<\/p>\n
the eaxiy disposal of the suit.\n<\/p>\n
KK<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Afzal vs Smt Saroja on 7 August, 2008 Author: B.S.Patil Ill ms HIGH COURT 0FmK.iR}iATAl\u20ac.A arr BAHGALORE mm\u00bb 1-ms THE 71! ms? or AUGUST, ammas mm Hoxrnm un..ms1-rm 1:.s.1\u00bb2i*-%\u00ab%’:1:’1!e,iV’T%.1 ” ~ ‘ A’ M3Am.\u00ab16( _: . 1 % \ufb01 A u.1r.A.xo.451._7_(2o”c-3 S\/o hate Abdul Khadar, Aged about38y\u00a2ars, National Mu\ufb02omand D.No.10,Dr.RajLfum,3;*Road; ” ~ […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-71359","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAfzal vs Smt Saroja on 7 August, 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\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Afzal vs Smt Saroja on 7 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-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=\"2008-08-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-11-21T09:52:18+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\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Afzal vs Smt Saroja on 7 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-11-21T09:52:18+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1279,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008\",\"name\":\"Afzal vs Smt Saroja on 7 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-11-21T09:52:18+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Afzal vs Smt Saroja on 7 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":"Afzal vs Smt Saroja on 7 August, 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\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Afzal vs Smt Saroja on 7 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-11-21T09:52:18+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\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Afzal vs Smt Saroja on 7 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-11-21T09:52:18+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008"},"wordCount":1279,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008","name":"Afzal vs Smt Saroja on 7 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-11-21T09:52:18+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/afzal-vs-smt-saroja-on-7-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Afzal vs Smt Saroja on 7 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\/71359","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=71359"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/71359\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=71359"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=71359"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=71359"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}