{"id":85631,"date":"2009-05-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-05-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3"},"modified":"2017-12-20T06:46:56","modified_gmt":"2017-12-20T01:16:56","slug":"dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3","title":{"rendered":"Dr. Ravi Kant vs Shri Ved Ram & Ors. on 4 May, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court<\/div>\n
Dr. Ravi Kant vs Shri Ved Ram & Ors. on 4 May, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: Kailash Gambhir<\/div>\n
         * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI\n\n+                     FAO No. 168\/99\n\n                      Judgment reserved on: 20.2.2008\n%                     Judgment delivered on: 04.05.2009\n\n\nDr. Ravi Kant                               ...... Appellant\n                      Through: Mr. Vimal Wadhawan, Advocate\n\n                                versus\n\n\nShri Ved Ram & Ors.                       ..... Respondents\n                      Through: Mr. Pradeep Gaur, Advocate\n\n\nCORAM:\nHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR\n\n1.    Whether the Reporters of local papers may\n      be allowed to see the judgment?                NO\n\n2.    To be referred to Reporter or not?             NO\n\n3.    Whether the judgment should be reported        NO\n      in the Digest?\n\n\nKAILASH GAMBHIR, J.\n<\/pre>\n
1.    The present appeal arises out of the award of compensation<\/p>\n
passed by the Learned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal on 5\/11\/1998 for<\/p>\n
enhancement of compensation. The learned Tribunal awarded a total<\/p>\n
FAO NO. 168\/1999                                              Page 1 of 10<\/span>
\n amount of Rs. 22,000\/- with an interest @ 12% PA for the injuries<\/p>\n
caused to the claimant appellant in the motor accident.<\/p>\n
2.    The brief conspectus of facts is as under:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
3.    On 13.11.92 at about 1.30 p.m. the appellant was going on his<\/p>\n
scooter while one Kishan Singh Verma was sitting on the pillion. When<\/p>\n
they reached Sham Giri Temple cut at I.S.B.T. fly over road, they were<\/p>\n
hit by a truck bearing registration No. DIG-8339 which was being<\/p>\n
driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 1 at a high speed. The<\/p>\n
appellant fell down and received grievous injuries on his person.<\/p>\n
4.    A claim petition was filed on 31\/1\/1994 and an award was passed<\/p>\n
on 5\/11\/1998. Aggrieved with the said award enhancement is claimed<\/p>\n
by way of the present appeal.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
5.    Sh. Vimal Wadhawan counsel for the appellant claimant urged<\/p>\n
that the tribunal erred in assessing the income of the claimant<\/p>\n
appellant at Rs. 3,000\/- PM and the same should have been assessed<\/p>\n
at Rs. 6,000\/-. Based on this, it is further contended that the<\/p>\n
compensation for loss of income should also be enhanced, accordingly.<\/p>\n
The Counsel also contended that the amount of compensation granted<\/p>\n
towards medical expenses should be enhanced. He claimed an amount<\/p>\n
FAO NO. 168\/1999                                               Page 2 of 10<\/span>
\n of Rs. 1,00,000\/- towards the medical treatment and expenses.<\/p>\n
Enhancement is also claimed at Rs. 50,000\/- towards conveyance.<\/p>\n
Amount towards the special diet is also sought to be enhanced to<\/p>\n
50,000\/-. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 3,000\/- towards mental<\/p>\n
pain & suffering but the appellant showed his discontent to that as well<\/p>\n
and averred that it should have been Rs. 50,000\/-. For permanent<\/p>\n
disablement also he sought enhancement from Rs. 9,000\/- to Rs.<\/p>\n
1,16,640\/-. Amount towards expenses incurred in repairing the<\/p>\n
damage to the car is also claimed through this appeal. Further the<\/p>\n
counsel urged that the tribunal erred in awarding an interest of 12% pa<\/p>\n
from 31\/1\/1994 till 21\/4\/1994 and from 14\/5\/1994 till realization<\/p>\n
instead of awarding the same from the date of filing of the petition till<\/p>\n
realisation.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
6.    Per contra, Mr. Pradeep Gaur counsel for the respondent<\/p>\n
insurance company refuted the contentions of the counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellant and submitted that the award passed by the Ld. Tribunal is<\/p>\n
just and fair and does not require any interference of this court.<\/p>\n
7.    I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the<\/p>\n
record.\n<\/p>\n
FAO NO. 168\/1999                                                 Page 3 of 10<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
 8.    In a plethora of cases the Hon’ble Apex Court and various High<\/p>\n
Courts have held that the emphasis of the courts in personal injury<\/p>\n
cases should be on awarding substantial, just and fair damages and<\/p>\n
not mere token amount. In cases of personal injuries the general<\/p>\n
principle is that such sum of compensation should be awarded which<\/p>\n
puts the injured in the same position as he would have been had<\/p>\n
accident not taken place. In examining the question of damages for<\/p>\n
personal injury, it is axiomatic that pecuniary and non-pecuniary heads<\/p>\n
of damages are required to be taken in to account. In this regard the<\/p>\n
Supreme Court in Divisional Controller, KSRTC v. Mahadeva<\/p>\n
Shetty,<\/a> (2003) 7 SCC 197, has classified pecuniary and non-<\/p>\n
pecuniary damages as under:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
             “16. This Court in R.D. Hattangadi v. Pest Control
\n      (India) (P) Ltd.<\/a> 9 laying the principles posited: (SCC p.
\n      556, para 9)<\/p>\n
              ” 9 . Broadly speaking while fixing an amount of
\n      compensation payable to a victim of an accident, the
\n      damages have to be assessed separately as pecuniary
\n      damages and special damages. Pecuniary damages are
\n      those which the victim has actually incurred and which are
\n      capable of being calculated in terms of money; whereas
\n      non-pecuniary damages are those which are incapable of
\n      being assessed by arithmetical calculations. In order to
\n      appreciate two concepts pecuniary damages may include
\n      expenses incurred by the claimant:(i) medical attendance;
\n      ( ii ) loss of earning of profit up to the date of trial; ( iii )<\/p>\n
FAO NO. 168\/1999                                                          Page 4 of 10<\/span>
\n       other material loss. So far as non-pecuniary damages are
\n      concerned, they may include ( i ) damages for mental and
\n      physical shock, pain and suffering, already suffered or
\n      likely to be suffered in future; ( ii ) damages to
\n      compensate for the loss of amenities of life which may
\n      include a variety of matters i.e. on account of injury the
\n      claimant may not be able to walk, run or sit; ( iii )
\n      damages for the loss of expectation of life i.e. on account
\n      of injury the normal longevity of the person concerned is
\n      shortened; ( iv ) inconvenience, hardship, discomfort,
\n      disappointment, frustration and mental stress in life.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
9.    In the instant case the tribunal has awarded Rs. 5,000\/- for<\/p>\n
expenses towards medicines; special diet; and conveyance expenses;<\/p>\n
Rs. 3,000\/- for mental pain and sufferings; Rs. 5,000\/- on account of<\/p>\n
temporary disability to the extent of 9% of his right elbow and Rs.<\/p>\n
9,000\/- on account of loss of earnings for three months.<\/p>\n
10.   The appellant deposed before the tribunal as PW3 that due to the<\/p>\n
accident he received injuries on head and under right eye and also got<\/p>\n
fracture of nasal bone, right and left shoulders, collar bone and right<\/p>\n
jaw. His tooth got upset due to the accident and also received injuries<\/p>\n
on wrist. He also received fracture on his right elbow and his lower lip<\/p>\n
was stitched due to injuries. He also deposed that he received<\/p>\n
abrasions and lacerated wounds on his right knee joint.<\/p>\n
11.   On perusal of the award, it is manifest that the appellant did not<\/p>\n
place on record any medical bills or bills for purchase of electronic<\/p>\n
FAO NO. 168\/1999                                                    Page 5 of 10<\/span>
\n machines which he required for the treatment. As regards conveyance<\/p>\n
expenses and special diet expenses also, nothing has been brought on<\/p>\n
record.    The tribunal took cognizance of the fact that the appellant<\/p>\n
received injuries on head and under right eye and also got fracture of<\/p>\n
nasal bone, right and left shoulders, collar bone and right jaw and<\/p>\n
other injuries referred above and awarded Rs. 5,000\/- even though the<\/p>\n
appellant could not prove that he had incurred such an amount<\/p>\n
towards medical expenses, conveyance expenses and special diet<\/p>\n
expenses. I do not find any infirmity in the order in this regard and the<\/p>\n
same is not interfered with.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
12.   As regards mental pain & suffering, the tribunal has awarded Rs.<\/p>\n
3,000\/- to the appellant. The appellant received injuries on head and<\/p>\n
under right eye and also got fracture of nasal bone, right and left<\/p>\n
shoulders, collar bone and right jaw. His tooth got upset due to the<\/p>\n
accident and also received injuries on wrist. He also received fracture<\/p>\n
on his right elbow and his lower lip was stitched due to injuries and<\/p>\n
also received abrasions and lacerated wounds on his right knee joint.<\/p>\n
In such circumstance, I feel that the compensation towards mental<\/p>\n
pain & suffering should be enhanced to Rs. 25,000\/-.<\/p>\n
FAO NO. 168\/1999                                                Page 6 of 10<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
 13.    As regards the compensation towards permanent disability, I feel<\/p>\n
that the tribunal has erred in awarding the same. It has come in the<\/p>\n
testimony of PW1 that the disability of the appellant is not permanent.<\/p>\n
But considering that no dispute in this regard is made by the<\/p>\n
respondents, no interference is made in the award on this count.<\/p>\n
14.    As regards expenses incurred in repairing the damage to his<\/p>\n
scooter, the appellant had not placed on record anything to prove the<\/p>\n
same. In the absence of any cogent or reliable material on record, I do<\/p>\n
not wish to award any compensation in this regard.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
15.    As regards loss of amenities due to permanent disability resulting<\/p>\n
from the defendant’s negligence, which affects the injured person’s<\/p>\n
ability to participate in and derive pleasure from the normal activities<\/p>\n
of daily life, and the individual’s inability to pursue his talents,<\/p>\n
recreational interests, hobbies or avocations. Considering that the<\/p>\n
appellant suffered amputation of his toe, I feel that the tribunal erred<\/p>\n
in    not   awarding   compensation   under   this   head   and    in    the<\/p>\n
circumstances of the case same is allowed to the extent of Rs. 25,000\/-<\/p>\n
.\n<\/p>\n
FAO NO. 168\/1999                                                  Page 7 of 10<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
 16.   As regards loss of earnings, no proof regarding income of the<\/p>\n
appellant was brought on record. The tribunal assessed notional<\/p>\n
income of the appellant at Rs. 3,000\/- pm and awarded Rs. 9,000\/-<\/p>\n
towards loss of income for 3 months, the period during which the<\/p>\n
appellant could not work. It is no more res integra that mere bald<\/p>\n
assertions regarding the income of the injured are of no help to the<\/p>\n
claimant in the absence of any reliable evidence being brought on<\/p>\n
record. The thumb rule is that in the absence of clear and cogent<\/p>\n
evidence pertaining to income of the injured learned Tribunal should<\/p>\n
determine income of the injured on the basis of the minimum wages<\/p>\n
notified under the Minimum Wages Act. However, considering that no<\/p>\n
dispute in this regard is raised by the respondents and that on applying<\/p>\n
the said principle at this stage, the compensation under this head will<\/p>\n
dwindle down and thus in the interest of justice, the award is not<\/p>\n
interfered with in this regard and compensation towards loss of income<\/p>\n
is taken at Rs. 9,000\/-.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
17.   As regards the issue of interest that the tribunal erred in<\/p>\n
awarding an interest for the period from 31\/1\/1994 till 21\/4\/1994 and<\/p>\n
from 14\/5\/1994 till realization instead of allowing the same from the<\/p>\n
date of filing of the petition till realization. The compensation for the<\/p>\n
FAO NO. 168\/1999                                                Page 8 of 10<\/span>
\n period from 22.4.1994 to 13.5.1998 has been disallowed. But on<\/p>\n
perusal of the award it comes into light that the appellant had been<\/p>\n
negligent and also took a lot of time in examining the witnesses. The<\/p>\n
claim petition was filed on 30\/1\/1994, issues were framed on<\/p>\n
22\/4\/1994 and petitioner evidence was closed on 13\/5\/1998. No doubt<\/p>\n
that the MV Act is a beneficial piece of legislation, legislated with the<\/p>\n
purpose of giving relief to the victim of the motor accident but at the<\/p>\n
same time, a victim of the motor accident cannot be allowed to gain<\/p>\n
benefit out of his own faults and negligence due to which delay was<\/p>\n
caused in disposal of the case. Therefore, the tribunal rightly,<\/p>\n
disallowed the interest for the said period, from 22.4.1994 to<\/p>\n
13.5.1998, to the appellant. Therefore, no interference is made in the<\/p>\n
award on this count.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
18.   In view of the foregoing, Rs. 5,000\/- is awarded for expenses<\/p>\n
towards medicines; special diet; and conveyance expenses; Rs.<\/p>\n
25,000\/- for mental pain and sufferings; Rs. 25,000\/- towards loss of<\/p>\n
amenities; Rs. 5,000\/- on account of temporary disability to the extent<\/p>\n
of 9% and Rs. 9,000\/- on account of loss of earnings.<\/p>\n
FAO NO. 168\/1999                                                Page 9 of 10<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
 19.   In view of the above discussion, the total compensation is<\/p>\n
enhanced to Rs. 69,000\/- from Rs. 22,000\/- along with interest on the<\/p>\n
differential amount @ 7.5% per annum from the date of institution of<\/p>\n
the petition till realisation of the award and the same shall be paid to<\/p>\n
the appellant by the respondent No. 2 as directed by the tribunal<\/p>\n
within a period of thirty days from the date of this order.<\/p>\n
20.   With the above directions, the present appeal is disposed of.<\/p>\n
04th May, 2009                                KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.\n\n\n\n\nFAO NO. 168\/1999                                               Page 10 of 10<\/span>\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court Dr. Ravi Kant vs Shri Ved Ram & Ors. on 4 May, 2009 Author: Kailash Gambhir * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No. 168\/99 Judgment reserved on: 20.2.2008 % Judgment delivered on: 04.05.2009 Dr. Ravi Kant …… Appellant Through: Mr. Vimal Wadhawan, Advocate versus Shri Ved […]<\/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":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-85631","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nDr. Ravi Kant vs Shri Ved Ram & Ors. on 4 May, 2009 - 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\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dr. Ravi Kant vs Shri Ved Ram & Ors. on 4 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3\" \/>\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=\"2009-05-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-20T01:16:56+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Dr. Ravi Kant vs Shri Ved Ram & Ors. on 4 May, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-05-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-20T01:16:56+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3\"},\"wordCount\":1866,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3\",\"name\":\"Dr. Ravi Kant vs Shri Ved Ram & Ors. on 4 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-05-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-20T01:16:56+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dr. Ravi Kant vs Shri Ved Ram & Ors. on 4 May, 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":"Dr. Ravi Kant vs Shri Ved Ram & Ors. on 4 May, 2009 - 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\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dr. Ravi Kant vs Shri Ved Ram & Ors. on 4 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-05-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-20T01:16:56+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Dr. Ravi Kant vs Shri Ved Ram & Ors. on 4 May, 2009","datePublished":"2009-05-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-20T01:16:56+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3"},"wordCount":1866,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3","name":"Dr. Ravi Kant vs Shri Ved Ram & Ors. on 4 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-05-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-20T01:16:56+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dr-ravi-kant-vs-shri-ved-ram-ors-on-4-may-2009-3#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dr. Ravi Kant vs Shri Ved Ram & Ors. on 4 May, 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\/85631","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=85631"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/85631\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=85631"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=85631"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=85631"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}