{"id":73498,"date":"2007-10-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-10-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007"},"modified":"2015-12-09T11:37:41","modified_gmt":"2015-12-09T06:07:41","slug":"prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007","title":{"rendered":"Prahalad Singh vs Jammna Bai And Ors. on 30 October, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madhya Pradesh High Court<\/div>\n
Prahalad Singh vs Jammna Bai And Ors. on 30 October, 2007<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 2008 (2) MPHT 72<\/div>\n
Author: U Maheshwari<\/div>\n
Bench: U Maheshwari<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
U.C. Maheshwari, J.<\/p>\n
1. This order shall decide the I.A. No. 3039\/07, an application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of CPC filed on behalf of the proposed respondents namely Bahadur Singh Lodhi and Ammir Singh Lodhi to implead them as party in this appeal.\n<\/p>\n
2. This appeal is preferred at the instance of the plaintiffs being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 4-5- 1991 passed in the C.O.S. 2-A\/78 (Old No. 41-A\/91) by the Third Additional District Judge, Sagar dismissing the suit seeking declaration and permanent injunction in respect of some agricultural land.\n<\/p>\n
3. During pendency of this appeal above mentioned I. A. is filed by the Counsel for the respondent No. 1 (a) to 1 (f) on behalf of the Bahadur Singh Lodhi and Ammir Singh Lodhi who acquired the right, title and the interest in the disputed property during pendency of this appeal from the deceased respondent No. 1 Jammna Bai in the year 1992.\n<\/p>\n
4. As per averment of it, each proposed respondents purchased the separate part of the aforesaid land from the deceased defendant\/respondent No. 1 Smt. Jamna Bai through two different sale deeds vide dated 2-5-1992. It is also pleaded that regarding present litigation the specific averments were made in the aforesaid sale deed. On earlier occasion an application in this regard was filed by the appellant but the same was dismissed as withdrawn and subsequent to it no step was taken by the appellant, hence, this LA. is preferred, their presence to adjudicate this appeal are necessary and on impleading them as party there will be no change in the nature of the case. The same is supported by an affidavit of Bahadur Singh; photocopy of sale deeds are also annexed with it.\n<\/p>\n
5. In reply of the appellant by disputing the averments of this I.A. it is contended that deceased respondent Jamnabai transferred the disputed property unauthorisedly to the proposed respondents during pendency of this appeal. Thus, in view of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act they will get the right only subject to decision of this appeal.\n<\/p>\n
6. In addition it is pleaded that on the strength of aforesaid sale deeds Bahadur Singh and Ameersingh filed their separate suits bearing C.O.S. Nos. 67-A\/93 and 68-A\/93 respectively in the Court of Civil Judge, Class I, Deori seeking declaration and perpetual injunction against the present appellant. On dismissing the same by the Trial Court vide judgment dated 14-3-2005, they filed their appeals bearing C.A. No. 15\/06 and 16-A\/06 respectively. The same were allowed by 6th Additional District Judge, Sagar vide judgment dated 4-11 -2006 on which present appellants have filed S.A. Nos. 330\/07 and 331\/07, the same are pending for adjudication in this Court. In view of such other litigation, it is apparent that some independent proceedings are going on between the proposed respondent and the appellants. Hence, their presences in this appeal are not necessary. With these submissions he prayed for dismissal of the application.\n<\/p>\n
7. Shri Sunil Vishwakarma, learned Counsel for the proposed respondents said that in view of the provision of Order 1 Rule 10 and Order 22 Rule 10 of CPC alongwith the provision of Section 52 of Transfer of Property Act they have a right to join the proceeding just to protect their acquired rights in respect of the disputed property; as after transferring the property the deceased respondent Jamna Bai and after her death her legal representatives had not any interest to contest this appeal. He also said that in order to avoid the further complication and multiplicity of litigations they should be permitted to join the proceeding under the right and limitation of deceased Jamna Bai. He also placed his reliance on a case of Apex Court in the matter of Amit Kumar Shaw v. Farida Khatoon<\/a> .\n<\/p>\n
7.1 On the other hand by responding the aforesaid argument Smt. Prabha Vishwakarma, learned Counsel for the appellant said that in view of the provision of Section 52 of Transfer of Property Act the presence of proposed persons are not necessary to adjudicate this appeal as the decree which would be passed in this appeal shall be binding against them and they will get the right in the property only subject to decision of this appeal.\n<\/p>\n
8. Having heard and perused the record alongwith the averments of I.A., reply and also the record of S.A. Nos. 330\/07 and 331\/07 in view of the following reasons I am of the considered view that this application deserves to be allowed.\n<\/p>\n
9. It is apparent on record that initially the suit was filed against the deceased respondent Jamnabai and other on dismissing the same this appeal is preferred by the appellant. In pendency of this appeal the proposed respondents purchased the disputed property from Jamnabai vide registered sale deeds dated 2-5-1992 and on their strength each of them filed their separate suits seeking declaration and perpetual injunction against the appellants. The same were dismissed by the Trial Court but the decreed by the Appellate Court against which at the instance of the appellants the Second Appeals bearing Nos. 330\/07 and 331\/07 are pending in this Court against the proposed respondents. In pendency of such second appeals the proposed respondents want to join this appeal to save their acquired rights and interest. As per provision of Section 52 of Transfer of Property Act the decision of this appeal shall be binding against them. Although in view of the aforesaid provision of the Transfer of Property Act the presence of the proposed respondents in this appeal is not necessary to pass the effective decree. But simultaneously it cannot be brushed aside that after transferring the property to proposed respondents perhaps Jamnabai and after her demise her legal representatives are not taking interest to defend this appeal. Besides this in view of the provision of Order 22 Rule 10 read with Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC after acquiring the rights by assignment they have a right to join this appeal for protecting their rights till the extent of the right of Jamnabai. In such premises, I am of the view that they should be permitted to join this appeal.\n<\/p>\n
10. My aforesaid view is fully fortified by the decision of the Apex Court in the matter of Amit Kumar Shaw (supra), in which it was held as under:\n<\/p>\n
 16. The doctrine of lis pendens applies only where the lis is pending before a Court. Further pending the suit, the transferee is not entitled as of right to be made a party to the suit, though the Court has a discretion to make him a party. But the transferee pendente lite can be added as a proper party if his interest in the subject-matter of the suit is substantial and not just peripheral. A transferee pendente lite to the extent he has acquired interest from the defendant is vitally interested in the litigation, whether the transfer is of the entire interest of the defendant, the latter having no more interest in the property may not properly defend the suit. He may collude with the plaintiff. Hence, though the plaintiff is under no obligation to make a lis pendens transferee a party; under Order XXII Rule 10 an alienee pendente lite may be joined as party. As already noticed, the Court has discretion in the matter which must be judicially exercised and an alienee would ordinarily be joined as a party to enable him to protect his interests. The Court has held that a transferee pendente lite of an interest in immovable property is a representative-in-interest of the party from whom he has acquired that interest. He is entitled to be impleaded in the suit or other proceedings where the transferee pendente lite is made a party to the litigation; he is entitled to be heard in the matter on the merits of the case.\n<\/p>\n
11. In the aforesaid cited case the application was moved at very belated stage with an explanation regarding delay. Considering the sufficient cause for such delay the application was allowed and the person acquired right during pending lis was permitted to join the proceedings. But in the case at hand as per averments of the sale deeds the pendency of this litigation was known to the aforesaid proposed respondents from the date of execution of the same in spite it they did not take any step to join this appeal for years together. Hence, by treating the application at very belated stage in order to compensate the appellant this application is allowed by imposing the cost Rs. 5,000\/- against each of the proposed respondent. Subject to payment of such cost to the appellant within 30 days, the Counsel for the proposed respondents are directed to incorporate their names as respondent Nos. 6 and 7 on the record.\n<\/p>\n
12. Accordingly the aforesaid LA. is allowed. Subject to such correction this appeal be listed for consideration of other pending I.As. alongwith the record of S.A. Nos. 330\/07 and 331\/07.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madhya Pradesh High Court Prahalad Singh vs Jammna Bai And Ors. on 30 October, 2007 Equivalent citations: 2008 (2) MPHT 72 Author: U Maheshwari Bench: U Maheshwari ORDER U.C. Maheshwari, J. 1. This order shall decide the I.A. No. 3039\/07, an application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of CPC filed on […]<\/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":[8,24],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-73498","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madhya-pradesh-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nPrahalad Singh vs Jammna Bai And Ors. on 30 October, 2007 - 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\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Prahalad Singh vs Jammna Bai And Ors. on 30 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-10-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-12-09T06:07:41+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Prahalad Singh vs Jammna Bai And Ors. on 30 October, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-10-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-09T06:07:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1504,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madhya Pradesh High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007\",\"name\":\"Prahalad Singh vs Jammna Bai And Ors. on 30 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-10-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-09T06:07:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Prahalad Singh vs Jammna Bai And Ors. on 30 October, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"Prahalad Singh vs Jammna Bai And Ors. on 30 October, 2007 - 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\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Prahalad Singh vs Jammna Bai And Ors. on 30 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-10-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-12-09T06:07:41+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Prahalad Singh vs Jammna Bai And Ors. on 30 October, 2007","datePublished":"2007-10-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-09T06:07:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007"},"wordCount":1504,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madhya Pradesh High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007","name":"Prahalad Singh vs Jammna Bai And Ors. on 30 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-10-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-09T06:07:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prahalad-singh-vs-jammna-bai-and-ors-on-30-october-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Prahalad Singh vs Jammna Bai And Ors. on 30 October, 2007"}]},{"@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\/73498","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=73498"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/73498\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=73498"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=73498"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=73498"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}