{"id":71771,"date":"2008-07-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-07-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008"},"modified":"2016-06-30T21:38:28","modified_gmt":"2016-06-30T16:08:28","slug":"gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008","title":{"rendered":"Gsrtc vs Champaben on 30 July, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Gsrtc vs Champaben on 30 July, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: H.K.Rathod,&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\nFA\/2229\/1997\t 5\/ 5\tORDER \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. 2229 of 1997\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nCIVIL\nAPPLICATION No. 5854 of 1997\n \n\nIn\nFIRST APPEAL No. 2229 of 1997\n \n\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nGSRTC\n- Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nCHAMPABEN\nRAYABHAI VAGRI & 4 - Defendant(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nDIPEN A DESAI for\nAppellant(s) : 1, \nNOTICE SERVED for Defendant(s) : 1 -\n5. \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\tMR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 30\/07\/2008 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n
1.\tHeard
\nlearned advocate Mr.Dipen Desai for the appellant ?  Corporation.\n<\/p>\n
2.\tPresent
\nappeal is filed by the appellant ?  Corporation challenging only
\nRs.1,30,000\/-.\n<\/p>\n
3.\tIn
\nthe present appeal, the appellant ?  Corporation has challenged the
\naward passed by MAC Tribunal (Main) in MACP No.363 of 1995 dated
\n10.12.1996. The claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.3,80,000\/- with 12%
\ninterest in favour of respondents claimants.\n<\/p>\n
4.\tLearned
\nadvocate Mr.Dipen Desai has raised contention that the claims
\nTribunal has not given any reason of attributing the liability to
\nextent of 75% to the ST Bus and only 25% to the deceased. He also
\nsubmitted that no cogent evidence of income was produced by the
\nclaimants and that Exh.22 to 29 are the copies of 7\/12 abstract and a
\ncertificate Exh.21 which has been given by Shamjibhai Harjibhai
\nhaving the income of Rs.50,000\/- from his agricultural land by the
\ndeceased. He also submitted that said Shamjibhai Harjibhai was not
\nexamined before the claims Tribunal and therefore, such certificate
\nshould not have to be taken into account by the claims Tribunal.
\nTherefore, the assessment of income is wrong, without any basis and
\nwithout any legal evidence. Therefore, the Tribunal has committed
\ngross error in awarding the compensation in favour of claimants.
\nExcept that, no other submission is made by learned advocate Mr.Desai
\nfor the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
5.\tI
\nhave considered the submissions made by learned advocate Mr.Desai and
\nalso perused the award passed by the claims Tribunal. The accident
\nhad occurred on 16.7.1995 while the deceased and his wife were going
\non scooter and when they reached at Nala, Tana Road, near Sagwadi
\nvillage, at about  3.00 p.m.,  one ST Bus bearing No.GJ-1-Z-95 came
\nfrom Tana, which was driven by opponent No.1,  in rash and negligent
\nmanner and dashed with the scooter, wherein Raiyabhai, scooterist
\nreceived serious injuries and died on the spot. Thereafter, a
\ncomplaint has been lodged with Shihor Police Station which was
\nnumbered as CR No.153 of 1995 against the driver of ST Bus ?
\nopponent No.1.\n<\/p>\n
6.\tBefore
\nthe claims Tribunal, applicant No.1 was examined vide Exh.33 and
\nrelevant documents were produced on record by the claimants. The
\nbirth certificate of the deceased was produced before the claims
\nTribunal vide Exh.32, the documents relating to agricultural land of
\nthe  deceased are produced vide Exh.21 and 7\/12 abstract was produced
\nat Exh.22 to 29, the Panchnama and complaint is also produced on
\nrecord vide Exh.18 and 19 and PM Note is also produced. The Tribunal
\nhas examined the matter on the basis of evidence and come to the
\nconclusion that width of the road is 11 ft. and looking to the width
\nof the road, the ST Bus was dashed from back side to the scooter and
\ndue to that, deceased was fallen down in Nala and one piece from the
\nmoped was attached to the ST Bus as mentioned in panchnama and
\ntherefore, considering this panchanama as an evidence which was not
\ndisputed by the Corporation, the Tribunal has come to the conclusion
\nwhile applying principle of res ipsa locuter, 75% negligence on
\nthe part of ST driver and 25% negligence on the part of deceased has
\nbeen attributed.\n<\/p>\n
7.\tLooking
\nto the panchnama, it is clear that ST Bus in 11 ft. road having at
\nleast about more than 8 ft width of the bus and one scooter driven by
\nthe deceased was there, naturally, it required safe driving by a
\nheavy vehicle when a small vehicle is going on the same road.
\nTherefore, that care was not taken which was the responsibility of
\nthe ST driver, not discharging properly and there was a less
\nnegligence on the part of deceased which was rightly assessed by the
\nTribunal on the basis of panchnama and also considering one piece of
\nmoped was attached to the ST Bus from back side which suggests that
\nST bus dashed with the scooter from back side and no proper care was
\ntaken by the ST Bus driver. Therefore, according to my opinion,
\ncontention raised by learned advocate Mr.Desai cannot be accepted.
\nThe Tribunal has rightly examined the matter looking to the panchnama
\nand also considering the principle of res ipsa locuter, therefore,
\nthe Tribunal has not committed any error in attributing 75%
\nnegligence of ST driver and 25% negligence of deceased. This being a
\nfact finding based on evidence, normally this Court cannot interfere
\nunless some rebuttal evidence  on record before the claims Tribunal
\nwhich has been ignored by the Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n
8.\tIn
\nrespect to the income, the contention raised by learned advocate
\nMr.Desai that assessment is wrong because there is no cogent evidence
\nproduced by claimants before the Tribunal in respect to income of the
\ndeceased. I have considered the observations made by the Tribunal in
\nPara.9 of the award. According to Exh.21 certificate, 80 bigha land
\nwas cultivated by deceased, which was owned by Shamjibhai Harjibhai
\nand 7\/12 abstract in respect to the agricultural land of Shamjibhai
\nwhich was produced on record vide Exh.22 to 29. Considering the age
\nof deceased as 40 years and looking to the certificate Exh.21 which
\nwas given by Shamjibhai, whose land was cultivated by deceased and
\nconsidering the prospective income of the deceased, Rs.4000\/- has
\nbeen assessed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has considered the
\ncertificate which are exhibited before the Tribunal. These
\ncertificates are not disputed by the appellant Corporation and same
\nwere proved by evidence of the claimants.  Therefore, the Tribunal
\nhas, looking to the prospective income of the deceased, who was aged
\n40 years  at the time of death, Rs.4000\/- has been rightly assessed
\nwhich cannot be considered to be on higher side and looking to the
\nage of the deceased,  multiplier of 5 has rightly been applied and
\nafter deducting 25% amount for the negligence of the deceased, the
\nTribunal has rightly awarded Rs.3,80,000\/- in favour of respondents
\nclaimants for 12%. Therefore, the contention raised by learned
\nadvocate Mr.Desai cannot be accepted because it is contrary to the
\nrecord of the Tribunal. The Tribunal has rightly assessed the income
\nand also compensation. For that, the Tribunal has not committed any
\nerror which requires interference by this Court. The Tribunal has
\nassessed the income including prospective income as Rs.4000\/- means
\nactual monthly income is not more than Rs.4000\/-. Therefore, the
\nTribunal has not bifurcated two income one actual and prospective
\nincome but, he clubbed together two income as Rs.4000\/-. Therefore,
\nthere is no error committed by the Tribunal while assessing the
\nincome of the deceased and rightly awarded the compensation in favour
\nof claimants. For that, there is no error found on record. Therefore,
\nthe contentions raised by learned advocate Mr.Desai cannot be
\naccepted and same are rejected. Therefore, there is no substance in
\nthe present appeal. Accordingly, present appeal is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
9.\tAs
\nthe First Appeal No.2229 of 1997 is dismissed, no order is
\nnecessitated in Civil Application No.5854 of 1997. Accordingly, Civil
\nApplication No.5854 of 1997 is disposed of. Ad-interim relief, if
\nany, stands vacated.\n<\/p>\n
10.\tThe
\nclaims Tribunal concerned is directed to disburse the amount as per
\nthe award to the claimants.\n<\/p>\n
(H.K.RATHOD,J.) <\/p>\n
(vipul)<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Gsrtc vs Champaben on 30 July, 2008 Author: H.K.Rathod,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print FA\/2229\/1997 5\/ 5 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 2229 of 1997 With CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5854 of 1997 In FIRST APPEAL No. 2229 of 1997 ========================================================= GSRTC – Appellant(s) […]<\/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-71771","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nGsrtc vs Champaben on 30 July, 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\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Gsrtc vs Champaben on 30 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-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=\"2008-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-30T16:08:28+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\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Gsrtc vs Champaben on 30 July, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-30T16:08:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1180,\"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\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008\",\"name\":\"Gsrtc vs Champaben on 30 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-30T16:08:28+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Gsrtc vs Champaben on 30 July, 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":"Gsrtc vs Champaben on 30 July, 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\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Gsrtc vs Champaben on 30 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-30T16:08:28+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\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Gsrtc vs Champaben on 30 July, 2008","datePublished":"2008-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-30T16:08:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008"},"wordCount":1180,"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\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008","name":"Gsrtc vs Champaben on 30 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-30T16:08:28+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gsrtc-vs-champaben-on-30-july-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Gsrtc vs Champaben on 30 July, 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\/71771","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=71771"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/71771\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=71771"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=71771"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=71771"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}