{"id":75933,"date":"2011-10-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-10-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011"},"modified":"2015-12-22T20:19:33","modified_gmt":"2015-12-22T14:49:33","slug":"letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011","title":{"rendered":"Letters Patent Appeal No. 77 Of 2 vs Mr Ph Pathak For on 13 October, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Letters Patent Appeal No. 77 Of 2 vs Mr Ph Pathak For on 13 October, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: J.M.Panchal, Honourable H.H.Mehta,<\/div>\n<pre>     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n\n\n\n     LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 77 of 2001\n\n\n             in\n\n\n     SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATIONNo 9183         of 2000\n\n\n\n     --------------------------------------------------------------\n     KARLI DOODH UTPADAK SAHAKARI MANDLI LIMITED\nVersus\n     RABARI DHIRJIBHAI SARTAN\n     --------------------------------------------------------------\n     Appearance:\n     1. LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 77 of 2001\n          MR RC JANI for Appellant No.\n          MR PH PATHAK for Respondent No. 1\n\n\n     --------------------------------------------------------------\n\n\n                  CORAM : MR.JUSTICE J.M.PANCHAL\n                                     and\n                          MR.JUSTICE H.H.MEHTA\n\n\n                  Date of Order: 06\/07\/2001\n\n\nORAL ORDER<\/pre>\n<p>                   (Per : MR.JUSTICE J.M.PANCHAL)<br \/>\n     By filing this appeal under Clause 15 of the<br \/>\n     Letters Patent of Bombay, the appellant has challenged<br \/>\n     legality of judgment dated August 30, 2000 rendered by<br \/>\n     the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.<br \/>\n     9183 of 2000 by which award dated September 23, 1999<br \/>\n     passed by the Labour Court, Kalol,        directing   the<br \/>\n     appellant to reinstate the respondent in service with<br \/>\n     backwages, is confirmed.\n<\/p>\n<p>     2.The respondent was employed as Store Keeper.   He<br \/>\n     was dismissed from service on August 31, 1987. He,<br \/>\n     therefore, raised, a dispute regarding legality of the<br \/>\n     order by which his services were terminated. On failure<br \/>\n     of conciliation proceedings, the dispute was referred to<br \/>\n     Labour Court, Kalol for adjudication, where it was<br \/>\n     numbered as Ref. (LCK) No. 83 of 1988.      Statement of<br \/>\n     claim was filed by the respondent to which written<br \/>\n     statement was submitted by the appellant at Ex.19.    The<br \/>\n     respondent had given evidence on oath which was recorded<br \/>\n at Ex.20. Thereafter the appellant had submitted an<br \/>\napplication at Ex.24 seeking permission of the Court to<br \/>\nlead evidence to prove misconduct of the respondent. The<br \/>\nLabour Court had rejected the said application and though<br \/>\ntime was granted by the Labour Court to enable the<br \/>\nopponent to challenge the said order before the High<br \/>\nCourt, the appellant accepted the order passed by the<br \/>\nLabour Court which was passed below application Ex.24,<br \/>\nand did not challenge the same before higher forum.<br \/>\nThereafter, the appellant did not cross-examine the<br \/>\nrespondent, though the matter was adjourned from time to<br \/>\ntime on four occasions. On March 24, 1999, the appellant<br \/>\nsubmitted an application seeking adjournment in the<br \/>\nmatter but the same was rejected by the Labour Court and<br \/>\nright of the appellant to cross-examine the respondent<br \/>\nwas closed. Placing reliance on the evidence adduced by<br \/>\nthe respondent, the Labour Court held that he had<br \/>\ncontinuously served for more than 240 days and the<br \/>\nappellant had not complied with the provisions of the<br \/>\nIndustrial Disputes Act, 1947 before effecting        his<br \/>\nretrenchment from service. Under the circumstances, the<br \/>\nLabour Court by award dated September 23, 1999, directed<br \/>\nthe appellant to reinstate the respondent in service with<br \/>\nbackwages.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.Feeling aggrieved by the      said   award,   the<br \/>\nappellant preferred Special Civil Application No. 9183<br \/>\nof 2000. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the same<br \/>\nby order dated August 30, 2000 giving rise to the present<br \/>\nappeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted<br \/>\nthat in view of the averments made in the written<br \/>\nstatement regarding misappropriation of the amount of the<br \/>\nappellant society, the Labour Court should not have<br \/>\ndirected reinstatement in service with backwages.    What<br \/>\nwas claimed was that having regard to the averments made<br \/>\nin the written statement, the matter should be remanded<br \/>\nto the Labour Court reserving liberty to the appellant to<br \/>\nlead evidence to prove misconduct against the respondent.<br \/>\nLastly, it was submitted that during interregnum period,<br \/>\nthe respondent was gainfully employed, and therefore, in<br \/>\nany view of the matter, the direction to pay backwages<br \/>\nduring the said interregnum period should be set aside by<br \/>\nthis Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.We have heard the learned Counsel for         the<br \/>\nappellant and taken into consideration the record of the<br \/>\ncase. A bare reading of the award makes it evident that<br \/>\nthough sufficient opportunity was given to the appellant<br \/>\nto prove its case, no evidence worth the name was led by<br \/>\n the appellant in support of averments made in the written<br \/>\nstatement.    The observations made by the Labour Court in<br \/>\nthe Award would indicate that the appellant was merely<br \/>\ninterested in prolonging the case on one pretext or<br \/>\nother. Though the order passed by the Labour Court below<br \/>\napplication Ex.24 is accepted by appellant, it was argued<br \/>\nthat in view of the admission made by the respondent that<br \/>\nhe had committed misappropriation of the funds belonging<br \/>\nto the appellant society, the award should be set aside.<br \/>\nHowever, we find that so called admission was never<br \/>\nproduced by the appellant nor proved before the Labour<br \/>\nCourt and does not form part of the record of the Labour<br \/>\nCourt.    Under the circumstances, we are of the opinion<br \/>\nthat the Labour Court did not commit any error in<br \/>\naccepting    uncontroverted   and   unchallenged evidence<br \/>\nadduced by the respondent and setting aside the order by<br \/>\nwhich the services of the respondent were terminated.<br \/>\nThus direction to reinstate the respondent in service<br \/>\ngranted by Labour Court being eminently just, is rightly<br \/>\nupheld by the learned Single Judge. Similarly, the claim<br \/>\nmade by the appellant that during the interregnum period,<br \/>\nthe respondent was gainfully employed, and therefore,<br \/>\nbackwages should not have been awarded to him, is devoid<br \/>\nof merits. It is true that before the Labour Court, some<br \/>\ndocuments were sought to be produced by the appellant to<br \/>\nestablish that during interregnum period, the respondent<br \/>\nwas gainfully employed, and therefore, was not entitled<br \/>\nto backwages.    However those documents are not proved at<br \/>\nall, and therefore, the Labour Court rightly held that as<br \/>\nthe respondent was not       gainfully   employed   during<br \/>\ninterregnum period, he was entitled to backwages.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.On over all view of the matter, we find that the<br \/>\nlearned Single Judge has not committed any error in<br \/>\ndismissing the petition filed by the appellant under Art.<br \/>\n226 of the Constitution and no ground is made out by the<br \/>\nlearned Counsel for the appellant to interfere with the<br \/>\nsame in the present appeal. The net result is that we do<br \/>\nnot find any substance in the appeal and the same is<br \/>\nliable to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.For the foregoing reasons, the appeal fails and<br \/>\nis summarily dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Date: 06-07-2001.(J.M.PANCHAL, J.)<br \/>\nccshah<br \/>\n( H.H.MEHTA, J.)\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Letters Patent Appeal No. 77 Of 2 vs Mr Ph Pathak For on 13 October, 2011 Author: J.M.Panchal, Honourable H.H.Mehta, IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 77 of 2001 in SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATIONNo 9183 of 2000 &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211; KARLI DOODH UTPADAK SAHAKARI MANDLI LIMITED Versus RABARI DHIRJIBHAI [&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-75933","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 v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Letters Patent Appeal No. 77 Of 2 vs Mr Ph Pathak For on 13 October, 2011 - 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\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Letters Patent Appeal No. 77 Of 2 vs Mr Ph Pathak For on 13 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-10-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-12-22T14:49:33+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Letters Patent Appeal No. 77 Of 2 vs Mr Ph Pathak For on 13 October, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-10-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-22T14:49:33+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011\"},\"wordCount\":948,\"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\\\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011\",\"name\":\"Letters Patent Appeal No. 77 Of 2 vs Mr Ph Pathak For on 13 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-10-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-22T14:49:33+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Letters Patent Appeal No. 77 Of 2 vs Mr Ph Pathak For on 13 October, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"Letters Patent Appeal No. 77 Of 2 vs Mr Ph Pathak For on 13 October, 2011 - 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\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Letters Patent Appeal No. 77 Of 2 vs Mr Ph Pathak For on 13 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-10-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-12-22T14:49:33+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Letters Patent Appeal No. 77 Of 2 vs Mr Ph Pathak For on 13 October, 2011","datePublished":"2011-10-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-22T14:49:33+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011"},"wordCount":948,"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\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011","name":"Letters Patent Appeal No. 77 Of 2 vs Mr Ph Pathak For on 13 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-10-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-22T14:49:33+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/letters-patent-appeal-no-77-of-2-vs-mr-ph-pathak-for-on-13-october-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Letters Patent Appeal No. 77 Of 2 vs Mr Ph Pathak For on 13 October, 2011"}]},{"@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\/75933","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=75933"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75933\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=75933"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=75933"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=75933"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}