{"id":85128,"date":"2009-03-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3"},"modified":"2018-04-07T03:28:36","modified_gmt":"2018-04-06T21:58:36","slug":"shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3","title":{"rendered":"Shaji vs Abdul Kalam on 16 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Shaji vs Abdul Kalam on 16 March, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nMACA.No. 2335 of 2007()\n\n\n1. SHAJI, AGED 35,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. ABDUL KALAM, KOORIPOIKA,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. UNNI, PLAVILA VEEDU,\n\n3. DIVISIONAL MANAGER,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.GIRISH\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.RAJAN P.KALIYATH\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR\n\n Dated :16\/03\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                  M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.\n                     ---------------------------\n                  M.A.C.A.No.2335 of 2007- F\n                    -----------------------------\n             Dated this the 16th day of March, 2009\n\n                         J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n<p>     1st respondent in O.P.(MV).No.1723\/1999 on the file of the<\/p>\n<p>Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kollam is the appellant.       1st<\/p>\n<p>respondent is the claimant.          Respondents 2 and 3 are<\/p>\n<p>respondents 2 and 3 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal.<\/p>\n<p>1st respondent filed a petition claiming a compensation of<\/p>\n<p>Rs.50,000\/- alleging that on 4.9.1999 at about 2.00 pm while he<\/p>\n<p>was standing on the northern road margin of Kollam-<\/p>\n<p>Thiruvananthapuram National High Way near Pallimukku, a goods<\/p>\n<p>auto bearing registration No.KL2\/D-2182 driven by the 2nd<\/p>\n<p>respondent came in a rash and negligent manner and hit on his<\/p>\n<p>body and he was thrown away and sustained serious injuries and<\/p>\n<p>appellant and 2nd respondent are liable to pay the compensation<\/p>\n<p>being the owner and driver and 3rd respondent is liable as the<\/p>\n<p>insurer.   Appellant filed a written statement contending that<\/p>\n<p>though he was the owner of the vehicle on 5.6.1996, he sold the<\/p>\n<p>vehicle to one Sebastian, S\/o. John of Eravipuram, after receiving<\/p>\n<p>the entire consideration by executing a sale deed dated 5.6.1996<\/p>\n<p>M.A.C.A.No.2335 of 2007- F<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                 2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>and thereafter the pick up van was under the absolute possession<\/p>\n<p>and enjoyment of Sebastian and second respondent was driving<\/p>\n<p>the vehicle under him and therefore, appellant is not liable. It<\/p>\n<p>was also contended that the amount claimed is excessive and in<\/p>\n<p>any case as the vehicle was insured with third respondent, third<\/p>\n<p>respondent is liable to pay the compensation.                Second<\/p>\n<p>respondent remained absent. Third respondent resisted the claim<\/p>\n<p>contending that the insurer did not inform the accident and did<\/p>\n<p>not make available the vehicular documents and in any case<\/p>\n<p>second respondent was not having a valid and effective driving<\/p>\n<p>licence at the material time and therefore for violated policy<\/p>\n<p>conditions, third respondent is not liable to indemnify the insurer.<\/p>\n<p>      2.   Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal on the evidence of<\/p>\n<p>Exts.A1 to A7 found that 1st respondent sustained injuries in the<\/p>\n<p>motor accident and the accident was caused due to the negligent<\/p>\n<p>driving of the vehicle by the second respondent. A compensation<\/p>\n<p>of Rs.16,900\/- was fixed inclusive of Rs.5,000\/- for pain and<\/p>\n<p>suffering and Rs.6,000\/- for loss of amenities and Rs.3,000\/- for<\/p>\n<p>loss of earnings for two months. It was found that the second<\/p>\n<p>respondent was not having a valid driving licence at the time of<\/p>\n<p>M.A.C.A.No.2335 of 2007- F<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>the accident and therefore there was violation of the policy<\/p>\n<p>conditions and hence the insurer is entitled to be reimbursed by<\/p>\n<p>the insured for the compensation payable to first respondent. An<\/p>\n<p>award was passed directing the appellant to deposit the<\/p>\n<p>compensation and on his failure third respondent was directed to<\/p>\n<p>deposit and realise the same from the appellant.             First<\/p>\n<p>respondent has filed this appeal challenging the award.<\/p>\n<p>      3.   Learned counsel appearing for the appellant and third<\/p>\n<p>respondent were heard.\n<\/p>\n<p>      4.   Learned counsel appearing for appellant relying on a<\/p>\n<p>photocopy of the registered sale deed executed on 5.6.1998<\/p>\n<p>whereunder he had transferred the vehicle in favour of Sebastian,<\/p>\n<p>S\/o. Joan argued that as the entire sale consideration was<\/p>\n<p>received and he transferred the vehicle on 5.6.1996, from<\/p>\n<p>5.6.1996 onwards appellant was not the owner and Sebastian<\/p>\n<p>was the owner and therefore, appellant has no liability to pay the<\/p>\n<p>compensation and therefore the award is to be set aside.<\/p>\n<p>Learned counsel also argued that in any case the Motor Accidents<\/p>\n<p>Claims tribunal should have passed an award against the second<\/p>\n<p>respondent-driver who caused the accident by his negligent<\/p>\n<p>M.A.C.A.No.2335 of 2007- F<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                 4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>driving and the liability of the owner is only vicarious. Learned<\/p>\n<p>counsel also argued that when third respondent admitted the<\/p>\n<p>insurance policy, they are liable to pay the compensation, and<\/p>\n<p>once paid the amount cannot be realised from the appellant.<\/p>\n<p>      5.   Learned counsel appearing for the third respondent<\/p>\n<p>relying on the decision of Apex Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/1912478\/\">Jose v. Chacko<\/a> (2001<\/p>\n<p>(3) KLT 633) argued that appellant who is admittedly the<\/p>\n<p>registered owner of the vehicle is liable to pay compensation to a<\/p>\n<p>third party and he cannot avoid the liability on the ground that<\/p>\n<p>there was a transfer by execution of a sale deed and delivery of<\/p>\n<p>the vehicle without transfer of the Registration Certificate.<\/p>\n<p>Learned counsel also argued that when there is no evidence to<\/p>\n<p>prove that second respondent was holding a valid driving licence<\/p>\n<p>on the date of accident and it is proved that there was no valid<\/p>\n<p>driving licence to the second respondent, Tribunal rightly<\/p>\n<p>permitted the insurance company for realisation of the amount<\/p>\n<p>from the appellant and there is no reason to interfere with the<\/p>\n<p>award.\n<\/p>\n<p>      6.   Though learned counsel appearing for appellant relying<\/p>\n<p>on a certified copy of a true copy produced before the Motor<\/p>\n<p>M.A.C.A.No.2335 of 2007- F<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                 5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Accidents Claims Tribunal argued that from 5.6.1996 onwards he<\/p>\n<p>is not the owner of the vehicle involved in the accident and<\/p>\n<p>therefore he has no liability to pay the compensation, in view of<\/p>\n<p>the decision of the Apex Court in Jose&#8217;s case (supra) the<\/p>\n<p>submission of learned counsel can only be rejected. Appellant<\/p>\n<p>has no case that he is not the registered owner of the vehicle<\/p>\n<p>involved in the accident, on the date of the accident. There is<\/p>\n<p>also no case that there was any change of ownership in the<\/p>\n<p>Registration Book before the date of the accident. The effect of<\/p>\n<p>the registered certificate and liability of the registered owner is<\/p>\n<p>settled by Apex Court in Jose&#8217;s case (supra). Hence, being the<\/p>\n<p>registered owner, irrespective of the transfer in favour of<\/p>\n<p>Sebastian as claimed, the appellant is liable to reimburse the<\/p>\n<p>compensation paid to first respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>      7.   But there is force in the submission of the learned<\/p>\n<p>counsel that Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal should have passed<\/p>\n<p>an award as against second respondent also. The finding of the<\/p>\n<p>Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal is that the accident was caused<\/p>\n<p>due to the negligent driving of the second respondent. Liability<\/p>\n<p>of the appellant, as the registered owner is the vicarious liability.<\/p>\n<p>M.A.C.A.No.2335 of 2007- F<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                 6<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Primarily the driver is liable. Therefore, Motor Accidents Claims<\/p>\n<p>Tribunal should have directed respondents 1 and 2 in the O.P.<\/p>\n<p>(MV) to pay the compensation. As insurance policy is admitted,<\/p>\n<p>Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal rightly directed the third<\/p>\n<p>respondent to deposit the amount and permitted third respondent<\/p>\n<p>to realise the same from the appellant.       The compensation<\/p>\n<p>awarded is just and proper and warrants no interference.<\/p>\n<p>      The appeal is allowed in part. While confirming the award<\/p>\n<p>passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, it is made clear that<\/p>\n<p>the second respondent is also liable to pay the compensation.<\/p>\n<p>Though learned counsel appearing for appellant submitted that<\/p>\n<p>he has deposited 50% of the amount and therefore the balance<\/p>\n<p>50% is to be paid by the second respondent. I cannot agree with<\/p>\n<p>the submission. Both the appellant and second respondent are<\/p>\n<p>liable to pay the compensation.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>                                      M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,<br \/>\n                                                 JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n<p>bkn\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Shaji vs Abdul Kalam on 16 March, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM MACA.No. 2335 of 2007() 1. SHAJI, AGED 35, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. ABDUL KALAM, KOORIPOIKA, &#8230; Respondent 2. UNNI, PLAVILA VEEDU, 3. DIVISIONAL MANAGER, For Petitioner :SRI.S.GIRISH For Respondent :SRI.RAJAN P.KALIYATH The Hon&#8217;ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN [&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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-85128","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Shaji vs Abdul Kalam on 16 March, 2009 - 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\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shaji vs Abdul Kalam on 16 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3\" \/>\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=\"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-04-06T21:58:36+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\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shaji vs Abdul Kalam on 16 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-06T21:58:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3\"},\"wordCount\":1160,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3\",\"name\":\"Shaji vs Abdul Kalam on 16 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-06T21:58:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shaji vs Abdul Kalam on 16 March, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Shaji vs Abdul Kalam on 16 March, 2009 - 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\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shaji vs Abdul Kalam on 16 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-04-06T21:58:36+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\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shaji vs Abdul Kalam on 16 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-06T21:58:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3"},"wordCount":1160,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3","name":"Shaji vs Abdul Kalam on 16 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-06T21:58:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shaji-vs-abdul-kalam-on-16-march-2009-3#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shaji vs Abdul Kalam on 16 March, 2009"}]},{"@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\/85128","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=85128"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/85128\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=85128"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=85128"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=85128"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}