{"id":87387,"date":"2008-08-27T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-26T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008"},"modified":"2018-07-06T12:26:58","modified_gmt":"2018-07-06T06:56:58","slug":"bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"Bhavani vs Torrent on 27 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Bhavani vs Torrent on 27 August, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: Jayant Patel,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCA\/83\/2708\t 14\/ 14\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCIVIL\nAPPLICATION - FOR ORDERS No. 8327 of 2008\n \n\nIn\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 17053 of 2007\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nBHAVANI\nCORPORATION - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nTORRENT\nPOWER LIMITED & 3 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nPK PANCHOLI for\nPetitioner(s) : 1, \nNOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1 -\n4. \nMR KB PUJARA for Respondent(s) : 1, \nMR HH PARIKH, AGP for\nRespondent(s) :\n3, \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 27\/08\/2008 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n
The
\n\tpresent application is preferred by the applicant to direct
\n\trespondent to grant electricity connection and to supply of
\n\telectricity, subject to final result of the petition.\n<\/p>\n
Mr.\n<\/p>\n
\tPancholi learned Counsel for the applicant at the outset submitted
\n\tthat the applicant is ready to deposit 50 percent of the outstanding
\n\tamount, and is also ready to file undertaking for 50 percent
\n\tremaining amount, if this Court is inclined to consider the matter
\n\tfor ordering supply of electricity to the applicant, as per the view
\n\ttaken by the Division Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal
\n\tNo. 278 of 2008 and allied matters dated  24.3.2008.\n<\/p>\n
Heard
\n\tMr. Pancholi learned Counsel for the applicant, Mr. Pujara learned
\n\tCounsel for the electricity company -opponent Nos. 1 and 2, Mr.
\n\tParikh learned AGP for opponent No. 3 and Ms. Niyati Shah for Mr.
\n\tD.K. Puj learned Counsel for opponent No. 4.\n<\/p>\n
It
\n\tdeserves to be recorded that the Division Bench of this Court in
\n\tcase of Torrent Power AEC Limited v. Shreeji (Rakhial)
\n\tCommercial Co-operative Housing Society Limited<\/a> reported at AIR 2006
\n\tGuj. 190, observed at para 7 to 11 as under:\n<\/p>\n
?S7.\n<\/p>\n
\tOn a conjoint reading of the provisions it is not possible to accept
\n\tthe case of the respondent ?  Company. Section 43 of the Act deals
\n\twith ?Sduty to supply power on request??. Under sub-section (1) of
\n\tSection 43 of the Act it is provided that on an application by the
\n\towner or occupier of any premises the distribution licensee is bound
\n\tto give supply of electricity to such premises, within one month of
\n\tthe receipt of the application for such supply. The emphasis on
\n\tbehalf of the respondent-company that the electricity is required to
\n\tbe supplied ?Sto such premises?? is misplaced. In the first
\n\tinstance, the application is by the owner or occupier of any
\n\tpremises, and hence, the phrase ?Ssuch premises?? takes meaning
\n\tfrom the preceding portion viz. owner or occupier of the premises.
\n\tThis becomes abundantly clear when one reads the definition of the
\n\tterm ?Sconsumer?? which talks of any person who is supplied
\n\telectricity and includes any person whose premises are for the time
\n\tbeing connected for the purpose of receiving electricity. In other
\n\twords, the consumer is one who receives, or is supplied electric
\n\tpower and the premises are of the consumer. Section 2(70) which
\n\tdefines ?Ssupply?? specifically states that supply means sale of
\n\telectricity to a consumer. The definition does not talk of supply of
\n\telectricity to the premises.\n<\/p>\n
8.
\n\tWhen one proceeds to read Section 56 of the Act in the aforesaid
\n\tbackdrop, it is apparent that supply of electric power can be
\n\tdis-connected where any person neglects to pay any charge for
\n\telectricity in respect of supply which was made to the said person.
\n\tSection 56 of the Act does not talk of any premises neglecting to
\n\tpay any charge for electricity. In fact premises cannot be a
\n\tconsumer and, therefore, the stand of the electricity company does
\n\tnot merit acceptance. It goes without saying that only a person can
\n\tbe the consumer viz. the user of the electricity power and premises,
\n\tdivorced of a person, cannot be user of the electricity power
\n\tsupply.\n<\/p>\n
9.
\n\tThe Regulations of the Supply Code also do not carry the case of the
\n\trespondent-company any further. Regulation 4.1.11 only states that
\n\tin case of a new connection etc., an application need not be
\n\tentertained unless any due  of the applicant
\n\tin respect of any other service connection held in his name have
\n\tbeen cleared. Meaning thereby the same consumer cannot apply for a
\n\tnew connection etc. unless and until dues of any other service
\n\tconnection held in the name of the same consumer are cleared.
\n\tSimilarly, Regulation 4.1.16 stipulates that where in any area there
\n\tare two competing distributors of power supply a distributor shall
\n\tgive No Dues Certificate to the consumer to avoid any possibility of
\n\tpending dues of previous owner while purchasing new house premises,
\n\tif the consumer makes such a request. From that it does not flow
\n\tthat if the consumer does not obtain such a No Dues Certificate he
\n\tcannot be granted a new connection because of outstanding dues of
\n\tprevious owner.\n<\/p>\n
10.
\n\tRegulation 4.1.17 instead of assisting the case of the
\n\trespondent-Company works to the advantage of the consumer. It is
\n\tprovided in the said regulation that the distributor shall not
\n\tprovide more than one connection for one premises, but where a
\n\tconsumer opts for a second connection\/meter such consumer will have
\n\tto produce documents showing existence of a separate legal entity
\n\tsuch as separate Permanent Account Number, separate Sales Tax
\n\tNumber, separate ration card and\/or a rent\/lease agreement. In other
\n\twords, once there is a separate legal entity in existence, in the
\n\tsame premises there could be more than one connection in case the
\n\tsame premises are occupied by two or more independent legal
\n\tentities. Therefore, this Regulation gives an inherent indication in
\n\tthe scheme of the Act and the Regulations that the connection is not
\n\tto the premises but to the person viz. a separate legal entity. It
\n\tis necessary to take note of the definition of the term ?Sperson??
\n\twhich is defined by Section 2(49) of the Act to include any company
\n\tor body corporate or association or body of individuals, whether
\n\tincorporated or not, or artificial juridical person.\n<\/p>\n
11.
\n\tSimilarly, Regulations 4.8.1 and 4.8.3 falling under the head
\n\t??Transfer of Service connection?? cannot come into play in the
\n\tcase of a third party auction purchaser at a public auction.
\n\tRegulation 8.7.5 stipulates that where power supply is disconnected
\n\tfor non-payment of any charges the consumer will not be permitted to
\n\tobtain electricity connection from any other distributor. This
\n\tregulation also does not stipulate that the supplier can withhold
\n\tsupply of power and reject an application for new connection in case
\n\tof a third party auction-purchaser.??\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tDivision Bench in paragraph No. 13 also inter alia observed that if
\n\tthe property is purchased at the public auction held under the aegis
\n\tof the Company Court and one cannot term a company which is wound up
\n\tto be a dishonest consumer. It is true that matter is carried before
\n\tthe Apex Court against the judgement of the Division Bench. However,
\n\tMr. Pujara learned Counsel for the electricity company is not in a
\n\tposition to show any material before this Court that the view taken
\n\tby the Division Bench is stayed by the Apex Court. The aforesaid is
\n\tcoupled with the circumstance that subsequently, in more or less
\n\tsimilar issue Division Bench of this Court vide order dated
\n\t24.3.2008 in Letters Patent Appeal No. 278 of 2008 directed for
\n\tsupply of the electricity on condition that 50 percent amount to be
\n\tdeposited, and for balance 50 percent amount, the undertaking is to
\n\tbe given by the person concerned that in the event the petition is
\n\tdismissed, he will pay balance 50 percent amount.\n<\/p>\n
Mr.\n<\/p>\n
\tPujara learned Counsel for the electricity by heavily relying upon
\n\tthe decision of the Apex Court in case of Dakshin Haryana
\n\tBijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. v. M\/s. Paramount<\/a> polymers Pvt. Ltd.,
\n\treported at Judgement Today 2006(9) SC 349 contended that
\n\tthe view taken by the Apex Court is different, and unless 100
\n\tpercent payment is made of the outstanding dues of the previous
\n\towner, this Court may not order for supply of electricity.\n<\/p>\n
It
\n\tdeserves to be recorded that in the case before the Apex Court, the
\n\tClause No. 21A, which has been referred to at paragraph No. 8, was
\n\tunder:\n<\/p>\n
?S8.\n<\/p>\n
21A(b) Reconnection or new connection shall not be given to any
\npremises where there are arrears on any account due to the Nigam
\nunless these are cleared in advance. If the new
\nowner\/occupier\/allottee remits the amount due from the previous
\nconsumer, the Nigam shall provide reconnection or new connection
\ndepending upon whether the service remains disconnected\/dismantled as
\nthe case may be. The amount so remitted will be adjusted against the
\ndues from the previous consumer, if the Nigam get the full or partial
\ndues from the previous consumer through legal proceedings or
\notherwise, the amount remitted by the new owner\/occupier to whom the
\nconnection has been effected shall be refunded to that extent. But
\nthe amount already remitted by him\/her shall not bear any interest.??\n<\/p>\n
Whereas,
\n\tSupply Code 4.1.11, which is pressed in service by the learned
\n\tCounsel for the electricity company, Mr. Pujara reads as under:\n<\/p>\n
?S4.1.11
\n\tAn application for new connection, reconnection, addition or
\n\treduction of load, change of name or shifting of Service Line need
\n\tnot be entertained unless any dues of the Applicant to the
\n\tDistribution Licensee in respect of any other service connection
\n\theld in his name anywhere in the jurisdiction of the Distribution
\n\tLicensee have been cleared??\n<\/p>\n
Therefore,
\n\tas such the observations which are pressed in service by the learned
\n\tCounsel for the electricity company by relying upon the decision of
\n\tthe Apex Court in case of Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam
\n\tLtd. (supra) may not apply to the facts of the present case,
\n\tbut the very Supply Code 4.1.11, which has been considered by the
\n\tDivision Bench of this Court in case of Torrent Power AEC
\n\tLimited (supra) would directly apply to the facts of the
\n\tpresent case, of course subject to the final decision, which may be
\n\ttaken by the Apex Court in the SLP against the aforesaid decision of
\n\tthe Division Bench.\n<\/p>\n
There
\n\tis one additional aspect, which also deserves to be considered, and
\n\trecorded and the same is that the electricity dues by virtue of the
\n\tagreement of the electricity company with the consumer, as it is,
\n\twould not create any charge or interest in the property nor such
\n\tcharge or interest is identified, as per the Provisions of the
\n\tTransfer of Properties Act. Therefore at the most, such dues may
\n\tstand as the outstanding amount, to be recovered or recoverable from
\n\tthe consumer, who enjoyed the electricity supply. Further, it is not
\n\ta case of voluntary transfer or the transfer effected by action of
\n\tthe parties namely purchaser and the seller, which normally can be
\n\ttermed as transfer and the consequence may arise for transfer of the
\n\tconnection also based on the same. But in any cases where, the sale
\n\thas been effected by way of statutory fiction, or due to any
\n\tcoercive order, as per the statutory Provisions, the question may
\n\tremain as to whether the enforcement of statutory Provisions would
\n\tmarch over Provisions of Supply Code, which at the most, can be
\n\ttermed as by way of subordinate legislation. Such subordinate
\n\tlegislation normally cannot be allowed to operate on the face of the
\n\tlaws, made by the Parliament. The other similar consequences, which
\n\tmay have bearing to the cases, in which the sale has been taken
\n\tplace by way of statutory fiction or coercive action under the
\n\tstatutory Provisions are that, in respect to the dues including that
\n\tof the Government dues, may be sales tax, income tax or other dues,
\n\tif the person has purchased the property, and if he is to undertake
\n\tthe separate and distinct activity over the same property, whether
\n\tsuch outstanding dues of the Government would prohibit the person
\n\tconcerned to undertake the activity? In normal circumstances, answer
\n\twould be no. Therefore, if the person by purchasing the property
\n\tirrespective of the outstanding dues of the Government, may be sales
\n\ttax, income tax, central excise etc., is in a position to utilise
\n\tthe property by way of a fresh licence or otherwise, there is no
\n\tprima facie reasons to foreclose such right by non availability of
\n\tthe electricity supply.\n<\/p>\n
I
\n\tam inclined to take such prima facie view, due to the peculiar
\n\tcircumstances that the electricity dues with the previous consumer
\n\tis only created by way of agreement, and it has not created any
\n\tcharge or interest in the property, and it only prohibits to that
\n\tconsumer to transfer, or to get the new connection, unless the
\n\toutstanding dues are cleared as per the Supply Code. Therefore, if
\n\tthe Government dues though are recoverable, the distinct and
\n\tseparate activity can be undertaken in the very property by the
\n\tpurchaser, on the premise that the Government dues would stand in
\n\tlater priority with the dues of the secured creditors. The
\n\toutstanding dues of the electricity cannot be put on higher pedestal
\n\tthan Government dues over the property, in cases where, there is
\n\tsale by statutory fiction, unless it is a case where the property is
\n\ttransferred with the dishonest purpose of frustrating rights, and
\n\tthe sale is only by way of an eyewash. Unless the electricity supply
\n\tis made available, it would be impossible for any person purchasing
\n\tthe property by way of statutory fiction, to make use of the
\n\tpremises for industrial purpose. Therefore, when the Supply Code
\n\tprohibits to the consumer, who was previous owner and does not
\n\tcreate fetter on the right of a new consumer, who has purchased
\n\tproperty by way of statutory fiction, it would not be prima facie a
\n\tcase to curtail right on the ground, as sought to be canvassed by
\n\tputting the condition to the fullest extent of depositing 100 of the
\n\tamount.\n<\/p>\n
In
\n\tview of the above, the respondent electricity company is directed to
\n\tsupply the electricity on condition that without prejudice to the
\n\trights and contentions in the main Special Civil Application, and
\n\tsubject to the outcome of the main Special Civil Application, the
\n\tapplicant deposits 50 percent amount including Government tax of
\n\t                   Rs.84,07,970\/- with the respondent
\n\telectricity company within a period of two weeks and files further
\n\tundertaking that in the event the petition is dismissed, or it is so
\n\tdirected by this Court, he shall pay outstanding amount of the
\n\tprevious owner within a period, as may be ordered by this Court in
\n\tthe main Special Civil Application.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tCivil Application stands disposed of accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
Mr.\n<\/p>\n
\tPujara learned Counsel for the electricity company prayed that the
\n\toperation of this order be stayed for some time, so as to enable
\n\trespondent-Electricity Company to approach before the higher forum.\n<\/p>\n
Considering
\n\tthe facts and circumstances, it is only after two weeks, the
\n\telectricity is to be supplied, the said request is rejected.\n<\/p>\n
  (JAYANT PATEL, J.)<\/p>\n
Suresh*<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Bhavani vs Torrent on 27 August, 2008 Author: Jayant Patel,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CA\/83\/2708 14\/ 14 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CIVIL APPLICATION – FOR ORDERS No. 8327 of 2008 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 17053 of 2007 ========================================================= BHAVANI CORPORATION – Petitioner(s) Versus […]<\/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-87387","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nBhavani vs Torrent on 27 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bhavani vs Torrent on 27 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-08-26T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-07-06T06:56:58+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=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bhavani vs Torrent on 27 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-06T06:56:58+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":2353,\"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\\\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008\",\"name\":\"Bhavani vs Torrent on 27 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-06T06:56:58+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bhavani vs Torrent on 27 August, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/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":"Bhavani vs Torrent on 27 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bhavani vs Torrent on 27 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-26T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-07-06T06:56:58+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bhavani vs Torrent on 27 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-06T06:56:58+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008"},"wordCount":2353,"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\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008","name":"Bhavani vs Torrent on 27 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-06T06:56:58+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhavani-vs-torrent-on-27-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bhavani vs Torrent on 27 August, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/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\/87387","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=87387"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/87387\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=87387"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=87387"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=87387"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}