{"id":94171,"date":"2009-04-27T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-04-26T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009"},"modified":"2019-01-23T22:52:19","modified_gmt":"2019-01-23T17:22:19","slug":"padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009","title":{"rendered":"Padma Thapa vs Rakesh Kumar & Ors. on 27 April, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court<\/div>\n
Padma Thapa vs Rakesh Kumar & Ors. on 27 April, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: Kailash Gambhir<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI\n\n                FAO No. 343\/2002\n\n                           Judgment reserved on :14.3.2008\n                           Judgment delivered on:27.4.2009\n\n\nPadma Thapa                              ..... Appellants.\n                      Through: Mr. O.P. Goyal, Adv.\n\n                      versus\n\nRakesh Kumar & Ors.           ..... Respondents\n                  Through: Nemo\n\n    CORAM:\n\n     HON'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
   FAO NO. 343\/2002                                    Page 1 of 8<\/span><\/p>\n
 1.    The present appeal arises out of the award dated 23\/2\/2002<\/p>\n
of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal whereby the Tribunal<\/p>\n
awarded a sum of Rs. 3,46,000\/- along with interest @ 9% per<\/p>\n
annum to the claimants.\n<\/p>\n
2.    The brief conspectus of the facts is as follows:<\/p>\n
3.    On 27.10.99 at about 7.10 a.m. in the morning Krishan<\/p>\n
Bahadur Thapa on his two wheeler scooter was going to his place<\/p>\n
of work when on the crossing of Moti Nagar, Matador bearing<\/p>\n
registration No. DL-2CR-2502 being driven in a rash and negligent<\/p>\n
manner by Rakesh Kumar hit against his scooter, resulting into<\/p>\n
the death of the deceased.\n<\/p>\n
4.    A claim petition was filed on 14\/1\/2000 and an award was<\/p>\n
passed    on    23\/2\/2002.   Aggrieved    with   the     said     award<\/p>\n
enhancement is claimed by way of the present appeal.<\/p>\n
5.    Sh. O.P. Goyal counsel for the appellants contended that the<\/p>\n
tribunal erred in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.<\/p>\n
3,000\/- per month whereas after looking at the facts and<\/p>\n
circumstances of the case the tribunal should have assessed the<\/p>\n
     FAO NO. 343\/2002                                           Page 2 of 8<\/span>
\n income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000\/- per month. The counsel<\/p>\n
further maintained that the tribunal erred in making the<\/p>\n
deduction to the tune of 1\/3 of the income of the deceased<\/p>\n
towards personal expenses when the deceased was supporting<\/p>\n
his wife and aged parents. The counsel submitted that the<\/p>\n
tribunal erroneously applied the multiplier of 14 while computing<\/p>\n
compensation when according to the facts and circumstances of<\/p>\n
the case multiplier of 17 should have been applied. It was urged<\/p>\n
by the counsel that the tribunal erred in not considering future<\/p>\n
prospects   while      computing   compensation   as   it   failed   to<\/p>\n
appreciate that the deceased would have earned much more in<\/p>\n
near future as he was of 33 yrs of age only and would have lived<\/p>\n
for another 30-35 yrs had he not met with the accident. It was<\/p>\n
also alleged by the counsel that the tribunal did not consider the<\/p>\n
fact that due to high rates of inflation the deceased would have<\/p>\n
earned much more in near future and the tribunal also failed in<\/p>\n
appreciating the fact that even the minimum wages are revised<\/p>\n
twice in an year and hence, the deceased would have earned<\/p>\n
much more in his life span. The counsel also raised the<\/p>\n
contention that the rate of interest allowed by the tribunal is on<\/p>\n
the lower side and the tribunal should have allowed simple<\/p>\n
    FAO NO. 343\/2002                                         Page 3 of 8<\/span>
\n interest @ 12% per annum in place of only 9% per annum. The<\/p>\n
counsel contended that the tribunal has erred in not awarding<\/p>\n
compensation towards loss of love & affection, funeral expenses,<\/p>\n
loss of estate, loss of consortium, mental pain and sufferings and<\/p>\n
the loss of services, which were being rendered by the deceased<\/p>\n
to the appellants.\n<\/p>\n
6.    Nobody has been appearing for the respondents.<\/p>\n
7.    I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and<\/p>\n
perused the record.\n<\/p>\n
8.    As regards the income of the deceased, the widow of the<\/p>\n
deceased deposed that he was earning Rs. 3,000\/- pm as salary.<\/p>\n
PW2 Jr. Distt. Staff Officer, Home Guard who had brought the<\/p>\n
salary record of the deceased deposed that at the time of the<\/p>\n
death, the deceased was earning Rs. 3041\/- pm. The appellants<\/p>\n
claimants had brought on record Pw2\/A & B to prove the income<\/p>\n
of the deceased. After considering all these factors, I am of the<\/p>\n
view that the tribunal has not erred in assessing the income of<\/p>\n
the deceased at Rs. 3,000\/-pm. Therefore, no interference is<\/p>\n
made in relation to income of the deceased by this court.<\/p>\n
9.    As regards the future prospects I am of the view that there<\/p>\n
is no sufficient material on record to award future prospects.<\/p>\n
     FAO NO. 343\/2002                                       Page 4 of 8<\/span>
\n Therefore, the tribunal committed no error in not granting future<\/p>\n
prospects in the facts and circumstances of the case.<\/p>\n
10.    As regards the contention of the counsel for the appellant<\/p>\n
that the 1\/3 deduction made by the tribunal are on the higher<\/p>\n
side as the deceased is survived by his widow and aged parents,<\/p>\n
In catena of cases the Apex Court has in similar circumstances<\/p>\n
made 1\/4 deductions. Therefore, I am inclined to interfere with<\/p>\n
the award on this ground and make deductions to the tune of 1\/4.<\/p>\n
11.    As regards the contention of the counsel for the appellant<\/p>\n
that the tribunal has erred in applying the multiplier of 14 in the<\/p>\n
facts and circumstances of the case, I feel that the tribunal has<\/p>\n
committed error. This case pertains to the year 1999 and at that<\/p>\n
time II schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act had already been<\/p>\n
brought on the statute book. The age of the deceased at the time<\/p>\n
of the accident was 33 years and he is survived by his widow and<\/p>\n
aged parents. In the facts of the present case I am of the view<\/p>\n
that after looking at the age of the claimants and the deceased<\/p>\n
and considering the multiplier applicable as per the II Schedule to<\/p>\n
the MV Act, the multiplier of 17 shall be applicable.<\/p>\n
12.    As regards the issue of interest that the rate of interest of<\/p>\n
9% p.a. awarded by the tribunal is on the lower side and the<\/p>\n
      FAO NO. 343\/2002                                     Page 5 of 8<\/span>
\n same should be enhanced to 12% p.a., I feel that the rate of<\/p>\n
interest awarded by the tribunal is just and fair and requires no<\/p>\n
interference. No rate of interest is fixed under Section 171 of the<\/p>\n
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Interest is compensation for<\/p>\n
forbearance or detention of money and that interest is awarded<\/p>\n
to a party only for being kept out of the money, which ought to<\/p>\n
have been paid to him. Time and again the Hon’ble Supreme<\/p>\n
Court has held that the rate of interest to be awarded should be<\/p>\n
just and fair depending upon the facts and circumstances of the<\/p>\n
case and taking in to consideration relevant factors including<\/p>\n
inflation, policy being adopted by Reserve Bank of India from<\/p>\n
time to time and other economic factors. In the facts and<\/p>\n
circumstances of the case, I do not find any infirmity in the award<\/p>\n
regarding award of interest @ 9% pa by the tribunal and the<\/p>\n
same is not interfered with.\n<\/p>\n
13.    On the contention regarding that the tribunal has erred in<\/p>\n
not granting adequate compensation towards loss of consortium<\/p>\n
and loss of estate, whereas, no compensation has been granted<\/p>\n
towards funeral expenses, loss of love & affection and the loss of<\/p>\n
services, which were being rendered by the deceased to the<\/p>\n
appellants. In this regard compensation towards loss of love and<\/p>\n
      FAO NO. 343\/2002                                    Page 6 of 8<\/span>
\n affection is awarded at Rs. 20,000\/-; compensation towards<\/p>\n
funeral expenses is awarded at Rs. 10,000\/- and compensation<\/p>\n
towards loss of estate is awarded at Rs. 10,000\/-. Further, Rs.<\/p>\n
50,000\/- is awarded towards loss of consortium.<\/p>\n
14.    As far as the contention pertaining to the awarding of<\/p>\n
amount towards mental pain and sufferings caused to the<\/p>\n
appellants due to the sudden demise of the deceased and the<\/p>\n
loss of services, which were being rendered by the deceased to<\/p>\n
the appellants is concerned, I do not feel inclined to award any<\/p>\n
amount as compensation towards the same as the same are not<\/p>\n
conventional heads of damages.\n<\/p>\n
15.    On the basis of the discussion, the total loss of dependency<\/p>\n
comes to Rs. 4,59,000\/- (3,000 x 3\/4x12x17). After considering<\/p>\n
Rs. 90,000\/-, which is granted towards non-pecuniary damages,<\/p>\n
the total compensation comes out as Rs. 5,49,000\/-.<\/p>\n
16.    In view of the above discussion, the total compensation is<\/p>\n
enhanced to Rs. 5,49,000\/- from Rs. 3,46,000\/- with interest on<\/p>\n
the differential amount @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing<\/p>\n
of the petition till realisation and the same shall be paid to the<\/p>\n
appellants by the respondent nos. 1 & 2, jointly and severally, in<\/p>\n
      FAO NO. 343\/2002                                    Page 7 of 8<\/span>
\n the same proportion as awarded by the tribunal within 30 days of<\/p>\n
this order.\n<\/p>\n
17.    With the above directions, the present appeal is disposed<\/p>\n
of.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
April 27, 2009                        KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.\n\n\n\n\n      FAO NO. 343\/2002                                  Page 8 of 8<\/span>\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court Padma Thapa vs Rakesh Kumar & Ors. on 27 April, 2009 Author: Kailash Gambhir IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO No. 343\/2002 Judgment reserved on :14.3.2008 Judgment delivered on:27.4.2009 Padma Thapa ….. Appellants. Through: Mr. O.P. Goyal, Adv. versus Rakesh Kumar & Ors. ….. Respondents Through: Nemo CORAM: […]<\/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-94171","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nPadma Thapa vs Rakesh Kumar & Ors. on 27 April, 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\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Padma Thapa vs Rakesh Kumar & Ors. on 27 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-04-26T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-01-23T17:22:19+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Padma Thapa vs Rakesh Kumar & Ors. on 27 April, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-23T17:22:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1324,\"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\\\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009\",\"name\":\"Padma Thapa vs Rakesh Kumar & Ors. on 27 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-23T17:22:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Padma Thapa vs Rakesh Kumar & Ors. on 27 April, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"Padma Thapa vs Rakesh Kumar & Ors. on 27 April, 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\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Padma Thapa vs Rakesh Kumar & Ors. on 27 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-04-26T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-01-23T17:22:19+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Padma Thapa vs Rakesh Kumar & Ors. on 27 April, 2009","datePublished":"2009-04-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-23T17:22:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009"},"wordCount":1324,"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\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009","name":"Padma Thapa vs Rakesh Kumar & Ors. on 27 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-04-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-23T17:22:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/padma-thapa-vs-rakesh-kumar-ors-on-27-april-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Padma Thapa vs Rakesh Kumar & Ors. on 27 April, 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:\/\/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\/94171","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=94171"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/94171\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=94171"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=94171"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=94171"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}