{"id":197722,"date":"2018-06-29T12:36:16","date_gmt":"2018-06-29T07:06:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=197722"},"modified":"2018-07-02T12:15:56","modified_gmt":"2018-07-02T06:45:56","slug":"no-provision-for-exempting-time-lost-due-to-carelessness-of-counsel-while-computing-limitation-sikkim-hc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/29\/no-provision-for-exempting-time-lost-due-to-carelessness-of-counsel-while-computing-limitation-sikkim-hc\/","title":{"rendered":"No provision for exempting time lost due to \u2018carelessness of counsel\u2019 while computing limitation: Sikkim HC"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Sikkim High Court: <\/strong>A Single Judge Bench comprising of Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.,decided an application for condonation of delay filed under Order 41 Rule 3A of Civil Procedure Code, wherein, while granting relief to the appellant (applicant herein), the Court held that no exemption for time lost due to carelessness of the council could be taken into account while calculating period limitation.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The application was filed for condoning the delay of 6 days in filing the appeal against the judgment of District Judge. The appeal was to be filed within a period of 90 days of the judgment as provided in Article 116(a) of Limitation Act 1963. However, there was a delay of 6 days in filing the appeal. The appellant submitted that the certified copy of the impugned judgment was misplaced by the counsel of the appellant. A photocopy of the same was submitted along with the appeal. On receiving an objection from the Registry, the counsel applied for another certified copy. The second copy was received after 34 days, which, according to the appellant, was the cause of the resultant delay.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The High Court considered the submissions and referred to Section 12 of Limitation Act, which provides for exemption of such time as was required for procuring a certified copy of the judgment to be appealed against while calculating the period of limitation. The Court, however, observed that such exemption was to be taken only for the time lost in acquiring the first copy. Further, <em>the clarification that the first certified copy of the judgment was lost holds no water, as no provision has been made for computing limitation for the carelessness of the counsel. <\/em>The Court was of the view that proper grounds were not shown for allowing condonation. Nonetheless, the Court held, the appellant ought not to suffer on account of what transpired in the chambers of his counsel. Thus, keeping in mind the paramount importance of handing out substantial justice, the Court exercised discretion in condoning the delay. The application was accordingly disposed of. [Nil Kumar Dahal v. Indira Dahal,<a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/MZzmz6tp\"><b>2018 SCC OnLine Sikk 123<\/b><\/a>, dated 26-06-2018]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Sikkim High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.,decided an application for condonation of delay filed under Order <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[8991,25354,30738,26724,30737],"class_list":["post-197722","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-appeal","tag-counsel","tag-misplaced","tag-period-of-limitation","tag-time-lost"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>No provision for exempting time lost due to \u2018carelessness of counsel\u2019 while computing limitation: Sikkim HC | SCC Times<\/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.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/29\/no-provision-for-exempting-time-lost-due-to-carelessness-of-counsel-while-computing-limitation-sikkim-hc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"No provision for exempting time lost due to \u2018carelessness of counsel\u2019 while computing limitation: Sikkim HC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Sikkim High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.,decided an application for condonation of delay filed under Order\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/29\/no-provision-for-exempting-time-lost-due-to-carelessness-of-counsel-while-computing-limitation-sikkim-hc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-06-29T07:06:16+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-07-02T06:45:56+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/05\/High-Court-of-Sikkim.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/29\/no-provision-for-exempting-time-lost-due-to-carelessness-of-counsel-while-computing-limitation-sikkim-hc\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/29\/no-provision-for-exempting-time-lost-due-to-carelessness-of-counsel-while-computing-limitation-sikkim-hc\/\",\"name\":\"No provision for exempting time lost due to \u2018carelessness of counsel\u2019 while computing limitation: Sikkim HC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2018-06-29T07:06:16+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-02T06:45:56+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/29\/no-provision-for-exempting-time-lost-due-to-carelessness-of-counsel-while-computing-limitation-sikkim-hc\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/29\/no-provision-for-exempting-time-lost-due-to-carelessness-of-counsel-while-computing-limitation-sikkim-hc\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/29\/no-provision-for-exempting-time-lost-due-to-carelessness-of-counsel-while-computing-limitation-sikkim-hc\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"No provision for exempting time lost due to \u2018carelessness of counsel\u2019 while computing limitation: Sikkim HC\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"No provision for exempting time lost due to \u2018carelessness of counsel\u2019 while computing limitation: Sikkim HC | SCC Times","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.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/29\/no-provision-for-exempting-time-lost-due-to-carelessness-of-counsel-while-computing-limitation-sikkim-hc\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"No provision for exempting time lost due to \u2018carelessness of counsel\u2019 while computing limitation: Sikkim HC","og_description":"Sikkim High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.,decided an application for condonation of delay filed under Order","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/29\/no-provision-for-exempting-time-lost-due-to-carelessness-of-counsel-while-computing-limitation-sikkim-hc\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-06-29T07:06:16+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-07-02T06:45:56+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/05\/High-Court-of-Sikkim.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/29\/no-provision-for-exempting-time-lost-due-to-carelessness-of-counsel-while-computing-limitation-sikkim-hc\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/29\/no-provision-for-exempting-time-lost-due-to-carelessness-of-counsel-while-computing-limitation-sikkim-hc\/","name":"No provision for exempting time lost due to \u2018carelessness of counsel\u2019 while computing limitation: Sikkim HC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2018-06-29T07:06:16+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-02T06:45:56+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/29\/no-provision-for-exempting-time-lost-due-to-carelessness-of-counsel-while-computing-limitation-sikkim-hc\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/29\/no-provision-for-exempting-time-lost-due-to-carelessness-of-counsel-while-computing-limitation-sikkim-hc\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/29\/no-provision-for-exempting-time-lost-due-to-carelessness-of-counsel-while-computing-limitation-sikkim-hc\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"No provision for exempting time lost due to \u2018carelessness of counsel\u2019 while computing limitation: Sikkim HC"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":323525,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/04\/sikkim-hc-clarifies-limitation-period-for-govt-application-of-condonation-for-delay\/","url_meta":{"origin":197722,"position":0},"title":"Limitation period for Government Applications governed by Art. 114(a) of Limitation Act, not Section 378 CrPC; Sikkim HC clarifies","author":"Editor","date":"June 4, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court was of the view that both, the applicant in viewing the requirement of filing the appeal within six months as per S. 378(5) CrPC; and the respondents contending that the appeal should have been filed within sixty days as per S. 378(5), were equally incorrect.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Sikkim High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Sikkim-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Sikkim-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Sikkim-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Sikkim-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":197646,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/28\/period-of-delay-is-not-the-criteria-while-considering-application-under-section-5-of-limitation-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":197722,"position":1},"title":"Period of delay is not the criteria while considering application under Section 5 of Limitation Act","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 28, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: A Division Bench comprising of G.S. Sistani and Sangita Dhingra Sehgal, JJ., refused to condone a delay of 65 days in filing the appeal under Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 which was consequently dismissed. The appellant filed the said appeal against the order of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":219307,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/09\/chh-hc-acquittal-appeal-filed-after-almost-a-deal-of-thirteen-and-a-half-years-dismissed-on-grounds-of-unexplained-delay-and-laches\/","url_meta":{"origin":197722,"position":2},"title":"Chh HC | Acquittal appeal filed after almost a delay of thirteen and a half years dismissed on grounds of \u2018unexplained delay and laches\u2019","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 9, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Chhattisgarh High Court: The Division Bench comprising of Prashant Kumar Mishra and Gautam Chourdiya, JJ., \u00a0dismissed an application for \u201ccondonation of delay in filing acquittal appeal\u201d on finding no satisfactory explanation for a delay of almost thirteen and a half years. The present application was filed for condonation of delay\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":301678,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/09\/16\/delhi-hc-limitation-period-to-appeal-against-family-courts-decree-is-thirty-days-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":197722,"position":3},"title":"Limitation period to appeal against Family Court\u2019s decree is thirty days, delay can be condoned if sufficient cause is shown: Delhi High Court clarifies","author":"Editor","date":"September 16, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cSection 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 operate in different spheres and apply to orders passed by different forums i.e., District Court and the Family Court respectively.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":211230,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/02\/raj-hc-delay-in-filing-the-appeal-due-to-ongoing-vacation-of-navratri-and-non-availability-of-counsel-in-jodhpur-not-enough-reason-for-condonation\/","url_meta":{"origin":197722,"position":4},"title":"Raj HC | Delay in filing appeal due to ongoing vacation of \u2018Navratri\u2019, and non-availability of counsel in Jodhpur: Not enough reason for condonation","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 2, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Rajasthan High Court: The Bench of Dinesh Mehta and Sangeet Lodha, JJ. dismissed the appeal filed against the order passed by the Single Judge of the Court whereby writ petition preferred by the writ-petitioner\/appellant seeking a direction to respondents to rectify the inventory after an inordinate delay of 54 years\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":305636,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/25\/nclat-dismisses-condonation-of-delay-application-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":197722,"position":5},"title":"\u2018Timelines are of great significance in IBC\u2019; NCLAT dismisses condonation of delay application","author":"Ritu","date":"October 25, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Limitation shall commence from the date when order is passed and shall not depend on the date when Appellant came to know of the order.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"national company law appellate tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/197722","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=197722"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/197722\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=197722"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=197722"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=197722"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}