{"id":6450,"date":"2025-06-19T16:18:12","date_gmt":"2025-06-19T10:48:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/?p=6450"},"modified":"2025-06-24T20:37:02","modified_gmt":"2025-06-24T15:07:02","slug":"union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\/","title":{"rendered":"7-Union of India vs. M\/s Kamakhya Transport Pvt. Ltd. Etc.Etc &#8211; Supreme Court of India Judgement"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<div data-wp-interactive=\"core\/file\" class=\"wp-block-file\"><object data-wp-bind--hidden=\"!state.hasPdfPreview\" hidden class=\"wp-block-file__embed\" data=\"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/4.-UNION-OF-INDIA-VS-MS-KAMAKHYA-TRANSPORT-PVT.-LTD.pdf\" type=\"application\/pdf\" style=\"width:100%;height:600px\" aria-label=\"Embed of 4. UNION OF INDIA VS M:S KAMAKHYA TRANSPORT PVT. LTD..\"><\/object><a id=\"wp-block-file--media-5723c5dd-88d0-4fb4-8820-6405c8881111\" href=\"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/4.-UNION-OF-INDIA-VS-MS-KAMAKHYA-TRANSPORT-PVT.-LTD.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">4. UNION OF INDIA VS M:S KAMAKHYA TRANSPORT PVT. LTD.<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/4.-UNION-OF-INDIA-VS-MS-KAMAKHYA-TRANSPORT-PVT.-LTD.pdf\" class=\"wp-block-file__button wp-element-button\" download aria-describedby=\"wp-block-file--media-5723c5dd-88d0-4fb4-8820-6405c8881111\">Download<\/a><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>1. Case Details<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Case Name:<\/strong> Union of India vs. M\/s Kamakhya Transport Pvt. Ltd. Etc.Etc.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Case Number:<\/strong> Civil Appeal Nos. 7376-7379 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 11566-11569\/2022)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Citation:<\/strong> 2025 INSC 805<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Court:<\/strong> Supreme Court of India<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Bench:<\/strong> Hon&#8217;ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Hon&#8217;ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Date of Judgment:<\/strong> June 5, 2025<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>2. Subject Matter<\/strong><br>The core legal question is whether the Railway authorities can raise a demand for punitive charges for the &#8220;misdeclaration of goods&#8221; <em>after<\/em> the delivery of the consignment, under the provisions of the Railways Act, 1989.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>3. Brief Facts<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The appellant (Union of India\/Railways) issued demand notices to the respondents (transporters) alleging they had misdeclared the description of goods in their consignments.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Crucially, these demand notices were issued <em>after<\/em> the goods had already been delivered to the consignee.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The respondents paid the demanded amount and subsequently filed claims before the Railway Claims Tribunal seeking a full refund.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The respondents&#8217; primary contention was that any penal charge by the Railways must be levied <em>before<\/em> the delivery of goods, making the post-delivery demand illegal.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>4. Lower Courts&#8217; Decisions (Railway Claims Tribunal &amp; Gauhati High Court)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The Railway Claims Tribunal allowed the respondents&#8217; claim and ordered the Railways to refund the amount with 6% interest.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Gauhati High Court, on appeal by the Railways, affirmed the Tribunal&#8217;s order.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Both lower forums held that penal charges, whether for overloading or other reasons, could only be claimed <em>prior<\/em> to the delivery of goods. They relied on their interpretation of Sections 73 and 78 of the Railways Act and the Supreme Court&#8217;s judgment in <em>Jagjit Cotton Textile Mills<\/em>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>5. Key Legal Principles Discussed by the Supreme Court<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Distinction between Misdeclaration (Section 66) and Overloading (Section 73):<\/strong> The Court highlighted a critical error made by the lower courts. The present case concerns the <em>misdeclaration of the type of goods<\/em>, which is governed by Section 66 of the Act. The lower courts wrongly applied the principles of <em>overloading<\/em>, which is governed by Section 73.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Interpretation of Section 66:<\/strong> This section empowers the Railways to charge a higher rate if the description of goods in the declaration is found to be &#8220;materially false.&#8221; The Supreme Court noted that Section 66 <em>does not specify any time limit<\/em> or stage (i.e., before or after delivery) for levying such a charge.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Legislative Intent:<\/strong> The Court contrasted Section 66 with Section 73 (overloading), which explicitly states that punitive charges must be recovered &#8220;before the delivery of the goods.&#8221; The absence of such a specific restriction in Section 66 indicates a clear legislative intent to allow the levy of charges for misdeclaration at any stage, including after delivery.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Precedent in <em>Jagjit Cotton Textile Mills<\/em>:<\/strong> The Supreme Court clarified that the lower courts&#8217; reliance on this judgment was erroneous. The observations in that case were made in the context of a different section (Section 54) and were merely suggestive, not a binding rule that all penal charges must be collected before delivery.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>6. Supreme Court&#8217;s Reasoning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The lower courts fundamentally misidentified the nature of the dispute. The demand notices were for &#8220;misdeclaration&#8221; under Section 66, not &#8220;overloading&#8221; under Section 73.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The plain language of Section 66 does not restrict the Railways from levying charges after the delivery of goods. The legislative intent to allow post-delivery recovery is evident when Section 66 is read in contrast with Section 73.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Therefore, the actions of the Railway authorities in raising the demand notices after delivery were legally valid under Section 66 of the Act.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>7. Final Order<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The appeals are <strong>allowed<\/strong>.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The impugned judgment of the Gauhati High Court and the underlying order of the Railway Claims Tribunal are <strong>set aside<\/strong>.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Consequently, the demand notices issued by the Railways are upheld, and the respondents are not entitled to a refund.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The core legal question is whether the Railway authorities can raise a demand for punitive charges for the &#8220;misdeclaration of goods&#8221; after the delivery of the consignment, under the provisions of the Railways Act, 1989.","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"csco_display_header_overlay":false,"csco_singular_sidebar":"","csco_page_header_type":"","csco_page_load_nextpost":"","csco_post_video_location":[],"csco_post_video_location_hash":"","csco_post_video_url":"","csco_post_video_bg_start_time":0,"csco_post_video_bg_end_time":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2777,2778],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-6450","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-judgments","7":"category-supreme-court-judgments","8":"cs-entry","9":"cs-video-wrap"},"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>7-Union of India vs. M\/s Kamakhya Transport Pvt. Ltd. Etc.Etc - Supreme Court of India Judgement<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The core legal question is whether the Railway authorities can raise a demand for punitive charges for the &quot;misdeclaration of goods&quot; after the delivery of the consignment, under the provisions of the Railways Act, 1989.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"7-Union of India vs. M\/s Kamakhya Transport Pvt. Ltd. Etc.Etc - Supreme Court of India Judgement\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The core legal question is whether the Railway authorities can raise a demand for punitive charges for the &quot;misdeclaration of goods&quot; after the delivery of the consignment, under the provisions of the Railways Act, 1989.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Insights by Karma AI\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-06-19T10:48:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-06-24T15:07:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/karmainsight.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1200\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"675\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Karma AI\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Karma AI\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Karma AI\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/cfb78f37dfe74f0397dc673286495f01\"},\"headline\":\"7-Union of India vs. M\\\/s Kamakhya Transport Pvt. Ltd. Etc.Etc &#8211; Supreme Court of India Judgement\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-06-19T10:48:12+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-06-24T15:07:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":637,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Judgments\",\"Supreme Court Judgments\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\\\/\",\"name\":\"7-Union of India vs. M\\\/s Kamakhya Transport Pvt. Ltd. Etc.Etc - Supreme Court of India Judgement\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2025-06-19T10:48:12+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-06-24T15:07:02+00:00\",\"description\":\"The core legal question is whether the Railway authorities can raise a demand for punitive charges for the \\\"misdeclaration of goods\\\" after the delivery of the consignment, under the provisions of the Railways Act, 1989.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"7-Union of India vs. M\\\/s Kamakhya Transport Pvt. Ltd. Etc.Etc &#8211; Supreme Court of India Judgement\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/\",\"name\":\"Insights by Karma AI\",\"description\":\"Law Simplified\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Insights by Karma AI\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Karma AI - Think Legal\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/01\\\/cropped-icon-1.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/01\\\/cropped-icon-1.png\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Karma AI - Think Legal\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/cfb78f37dfe74f0397dc673286495f01\",\"name\":\"Karma AI\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/3dc55b7c8c787d0bfb152056f4cea70a8f439b177f173ba6a8e712e0688bb021?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/3dc55b7c8c787d0bfb152056f4cea70a8f439b177f173ba6a8e712e0688bb021?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/3dc55b7c8c787d0bfb152056f4cea70a8f439b177f173ba6a8e712e0688bb021?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Karma AI\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/karma.law\\\/insights\\\/author\\\/admin\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"7-Union of India vs. M\/s Kamakhya Transport Pvt. Ltd. Etc.Etc - Supreme Court of India Judgement","description":"The core legal question is whether the Railway authorities can raise a demand for punitive charges for the \"misdeclaration of goods\" after the delivery of the consignment, under the provisions of the Railways Act, 1989.","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:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"7-Union of India vs. M\/s Kamakhya Transport Pvt. Ltd. Etc.Etc - Supreme Court of India Judgement","og_description":"The core legal question is whether the Railway authorities can raise a demand for punitive charges for the \"misdeclaration of goods\" after the delivery of the consignment, under the provisions of the Railways Act, 1989.","og_url":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\/","og_site_name":"Insights by Karma AI","article_published_time":"2025-06-19T10:48:12+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-06-24T15:07:02+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1200,"height":675,"url":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/karmainsight.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Karma AI","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Karma AI","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\/"},"author":{"name":"Karma AI","@id":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/#\/schema\/person\/cfb78f37dfe74f0397dc673286495f01"},"headline":"7-Union of India vs. M\/s Kamakhya Transport Pvt. Ltd. Etc.Etc &#8211; Supreme Court of India Judgement","datePublished":"2025-06-19T10:48:12+00:00","dateModified":"2025-06-24T15:07:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\/"},"wordCount":637,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Judgments","Supreme Court Judgments"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\/","url":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\/","name":"7-Union of India vs. M\/s Kamakhya Transport Pvt. Ltd. Etc.Etc - Supreme Court of India Judgement","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/#website"},"datePublished":"2025-06-19T10:48:12+00:00","dateModified":"2025-06-24T15:07:02+00:00","description":"The core legal question is whether the Railway authorities can raise a demand for punitive charges for the \"misdeclaration of goods\" after the delivery of the consignment, under the provisions of the Railways Act, 1989.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-m-s-kamakhya-transport-pvt-ltd-etc-etc-supreme-court-of-india-judgement\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"7-Union of India vs. M\/s Kamakhya Transport Pvt. Ltd. Etc.Etc &#8211; Supreme Court of India Judgement"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/#website","url":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/","name":"Insights by Karma AI","description":"Law Simplified","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Insights by Karma AI","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/#organization","name":"Karma AI - Think Legal","url":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/cropped-icon-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/cropped-icon-1.png","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Karma AI - Think Legal"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/#\/schema\/person\/cfb78f37dfe74f0397dc673286495f01","name":"Karma AI","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/3dc55b7c8c787d0bfb152056f4cea70a8f439b177f173ba6a8e712e0688bb021?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/3dc55b7c8c787d0bfb152056f4cea70a8f439b177f173ba6a8e712e0688bb021?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/3dc55b7c8c787d0bfb152056f4cea70a8f439b177f173ba6a8e712e0688bb021?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Karma AI"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/karma.law\/insights"],"url":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/author\/admin\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6450","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6450"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6450\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6584,"href":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6450\/revisions\/6584"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6450"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6450"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/karma.law\/insights\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6450"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}