{"id":93206,"date":"2009-05-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-05-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009"},"modified":"2015-03-18T14:32:35","modified_gmt":"2015-03-18T09:02:35","slug":"v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009","title":{"rendered":"V.M.Joseph vs Anapanthy Service Co-Operative &#8230; on 29 May, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">V.M.Joseph vs Anapanthy Service Co-Operative &#8230; on 29 May, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 25710 of 2007(I)\n\n\n1. V.M.JOSEPH, S\/O.MATHAYI, AGED 58 YEARS,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. ANAPANTHY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. CANARA BANK, IRITTY BRANCH,\n\n3. THE FEDERAL BANK LTD. VALLITHODE BRANCH,\n\n4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR.\n\n5. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, KANNUR.\n\n6. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE\n\n7. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.SURENDRAN\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.CIBI THOMAS\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN\n\n Dated :29\/05\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                              S. Siri Jagan, J.\n               =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=\n                  W. P (C) Nos. 25710, 25719, 25723,\n                 25726, 25796, 25818, 25840, 25843,\n                    25844, 25845 &amp; 25857 of 2007\n               =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=\n                    Dated this, the 29th May, 2009.\n\n                             J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n<p>      All these writ petitions raise the same issue and are therefore<\/p>\n<p>heard and disposed of together by this common judgment.<\/p>\n<p>      2. The petitioners claim to be agriculturists who possess land<\/p>\n<p>near forest areas. Since there are      no clear protective fence on the<\/p>\n<p>boundary of the forest areas, wild animals wanting into the properties<\/p>\n<p>of the petitioners and destroy the agricultural produces, is the<\/p>\n<p>grievance of the petitioners. For compensating such damages, the<\/p>\n<p>Government has framed a scheme styled as Rules for payment of<\/p>\n<p>compensation to victims attacked by wild animals, 1980 as per which<\/p>\n<p>for loss of human life on account of attack by wild animals, a<\/p>\n<p>maximum amount of Rs. 20,000\/-, for permanent incapacitation<\/p>\n<p>Rs. 10,000\/- and for loss of crops damages to houses etc., a maximum<\/p>\n<p>of Rs. 10,000\/- are prescribed. It is also prescribed therein that such<\/p>\n<p>payment would be made only once in an year. The petitioners are<\/p>\n<p>aggrieved by such restrictive clauses in the said Rules.<\/p>\n<p>      2. The petitioners have also availed of loan for their agricultural<\/p>\n<p>operations and since on account of the destruction of the crops by<\/p>\n<p>wild animals, they were unable to pay off the loan amounts, the<\/p>\n<p>concerned bank has initiated recovery proceedings . It is under the<\/p>\n<p>above circumstances, the petitioners have filed these writ petitions<\/p>\n<p>seeking the following reliefs:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>     &#8220;a)    Quashing Ext. P2 Rules as unreasonable, arbitrary and<br \/>\n     discriminatory.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>     b)     Directing the respondents No. 4 to 7 to accept Ext. P4<br \/>\n     estimate and pay the compensation payable to the petitioner on<br \/>\n     account of the loss sustained by him due to attack by wild animals<br \/>\n     in his properties.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">W.P.C. No. 25710\/07 etc.             -: 2 :-<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>      c)     Directing the respondents No. 4 to 7 to pay that part of<br \/>\n      such compensation necessary to satisfy the debt due to the<br \/>\n      respondents No. 1 to 3 and pay the balance amount to the<br \/>\n      petitioner as expeditiously as possible.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      d)     Directing the respondents No. 1 to 3 to keep all recovery<br \/>\n      proceedings     against the petitioner in abeyance pending the<br \/>\n      decision of the respondents No. 4 to 7.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      e)     Directing the respondents No. 4 to 7 to construct such<br \/>\n      devices along the forest boundary sufficient to prevent the entry of<br \/>\n      wild animals to the petitioner&#8217;s properties.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>      3. According to the petitioners, as assessed by the revenue<\/p>\n<p>authorities themselves, the damages caused to the crops of the<\/p>\n<p>petitioners were far more than the maximum amount payable under<\/p>\n<p>Ext. P2 Rules.      They would submit that there is no rationale for<\/p>\n<p>restricting the damages to Rs. 10,000\/-. According to them, the wild<\/p>\n<p>animals belong to the Government and for destruction of crops by<\/p>\n<p>wild animals the Government is liable to compensate the petitioners.<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, the Government cannot make rules restricting the<\/p>\n<p>compensation payable at Rs.10,000\/- in an year, is the contention<\/p>\n<p>raised by the petitioners. They, therefore, challenges Ext. P2 Rules to<\/p>\n<p>the extent it restricts payment of compensation prescribed therein,<\/p>\n<p>that too, only once in an year.\n<\/p>\n<p>      4.    The Government have not chosen to file any counter<\/p>\n<p>affidavit.     The    concerned      bank     has filed   counter     affidavit<\/p>\n<p>controverting the contentions of the petitioners.<\/p>\n<p>      5. I have considered the rival contentions in detail.<\/p>\n<p>      6. At the outset, I must note that Ext. P2 Rules is not one made<\/p>\n<p>under any enabling provision under any legislation either State or<\/p>\n<p>Central, although the Rules as framed have all trappings of a<\/p>\n<p>subordinate legislation. I specifically asked the learned Government<\/p>\n<p>Pleader as to whether the Rules have been framed pursuant to any<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">W.P.C. No. 25710\/07 etc.         -: 3 :-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>rule making power under any legislation. The learned Government<\/p>\n<p>Pleader    submits that it is only an executive order issued by the<\/p>\n<p>Government under Article 162 of the Constitution of India and not a<\/p>\n<p>subordinate legislation, although, on a reading of Ext. P2 Rules, it<\/p>\n<p>appears so.\n<\/p>\n<p>      7. Since it is only a Government Order, I am of opinion that the<\/p>\n<p>same is only a concession given to victims of attack by wild animals.<\/p>\n<p>The petitioners&#8217; right to claim compensation emanates from Ext. P2<\/p>\n<p>order only. That being so, the petitioners have to accept Ext. P2 as a<\/p>\n<p>whole and cannot claim compensation under the order and challenge<\/p>\n<p>a part of the Government Order restricting compensation.          If the<\/p>\n<p>petitioners have claims in tort, their remedy lies in filing a suit for<\/p>\n<p>damages if the Government is liable for such damages. The claim for<\/p>\n<p>damages in tort has to be proved by adducing evidence regarding the<\/p>\n<p>negligence or vicarious liability and quantum of damages. Such an<\/p>\n<p>exercise cannot be taken up and decided in a writ petition. Therefore,<\/p>\n<p>without prejudice to such right, the writ petitions are dismissed.<\/p>\n<p>                                         Sd\/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.\n<\/p>\n<p>Tds\/<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court V.M.Joseph vs Anapanthy Service Co-Operative &#8230; on 29 May, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 25710 of 2007(I) 1. V.M.JOSEPH, S\/O.MATHAYI, AGED 58 YEARS, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. ANAPANTHY SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. &#8230; Respondent 2. CANARA BANK, IRITTY BRANCH, 3. THE FEDERAL BANK LTD. VALLITHODE BRANCH, 4. [&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-93206","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>V.M.Joseph vs Anapanthy Service Co-Operative ... on 29 May, 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\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"V.M.Joseph vs Anapanthy Service Co-Operative ... on 29 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-05-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-03-18T09:02:35+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\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"V.M.Joseph vs Anapanthy Service Co-Operative &#8230; on 29 May, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-05-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-03-18T09:02:35+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009\"},\"wordCount\":780,\"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\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009\",\"name\":\"V.M.Joseph vs Anapanthy Service Co-Operative ... on 29 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-05-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-03-18T09:02:35+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"V.M.Joseph vs Anapanthy Service Co-Operative &#8230; on 29 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":"V.M.Joseph vs Anapanthy Service Co-Operative ... on 29 May, 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\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"V.M.Joseph vs Anapanthy Service Co-Operative ... on 29 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-05-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-03-18T09:02:35+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\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"V.M.Joseph vs Anapanthy Service Co-Operative &#8230; on 29 May, 2009","datePublished":"2009-05-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-03-18T09:02:35+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009"},"wordCount":780,"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\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009","name":"V.M.Joseph vs Anapanthy Service Co-Operative ... on 29 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-05-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-03-18T09:02:35+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-m-joseph-vs-anapanthy-service-co-operative-on-29-may-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"V.M.Joseph vs Anapanthy Service Co-Operative &#8230; on 29 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\/93206","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=93206"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/93206\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=93206"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=93206"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=93206"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}