{"id":204190,"date":"2018-10-25T12:00:53","date_gmt":"2018-10-25T06:30:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=204190"},"modified":"2018-10-29T11:17:26","modified_gmt":"2018-10-29T05:47:26","slug":"order-closing-right-to-lead-evidence-not-judgment-no-right-to-appeal-thereagainst-under-section-10-1-delhi-hc-act-1996-delhi-hc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/25\/order-closing-right-to-lead-evidence-not-judgment-no-right-to-appeal-thereagainst-under-section-10-1-delhi-hc-act-1996-delhi-hc\/","title":{"rendered":"Order closing right to lead evidence not “judgment”; no right to appeal thereagainst under Section 10 (1) Delhi HC Act, 1966: Delhi HC"},"content":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court:\u00a0<\/strong>A Division Bench comprising of Rajendra Menon, CJ. and V. Kameshwar Rao, J. dismissed an appeal against the order of a Single Judge whereby he closed appellant’s right to file list of witnesses as well as evidence by way of affidavit.<\/p>\n

The appellant had filed a suit for specific performance of an Agreement to Sell entered into between the parties. The respondents filed a written statement thereto. The issues were framed. Thereafter, counsel for the respondents informed the appellant regarding the death of Defendant 1. An application under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC was filed by the appellant to implead legal heirs of Defendant 1. Subsequently, the said legal heirs were impleaded in place of Defendant 1. As a matter of fact, the Joint Registrar closed the right of the appellant to lead evidence. When the matter was listed before the Single Judge, he declined appellant’s prayer for extension of time to file list of witnesses as well as evidence by way of affidavit. Aggrieved thereby, instant appeal was filed.<\/p>\n

The High Court considered the matter and found favour with the submission of the respondent who challenged the maintainability of the appeal inasmuch as the impugned order was not a\u00a0judgment\u00a0<\/em>and therefore not appealable. The High Court held that the order under challenge\u00a0did not\u00a0<\/em>amount to a\u00a0judgment\u00a0<\/em>conferring a right to appeal under Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966. Therefore, the order impugned was not an appealable order under Section 104 read with Order 43 Rule 1 CPC. Resultantly, the appeal was dismissed holding it to be not maintainable. [Kushal\u00a0Infraproject Industries (India) Ltd. v. Umed Singh,2018 SCC OnLine Del 12009<\/b><\/a>, decided on 22-10-2018]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court:\u00a0A Division Bench comprising of Rajendra Menon, CJ. and V. Kameshwar Rao, J. dismissed an appeal against the order of <\/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":[8991,9821,32210,32211],"class_list":["post-204190","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-appeal","tag-maintainability","tag-right-to-file-witnesses","tag-right-to-lead-evidence"],"yoast_head":"\nOrder closing right to lead evidence not "judgment"; no right to appeal thereagainst under Section 10 (1) Delhi HC Act, 1966: Delhi 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\/10\/25\/order-closing-right-to-lead-evidence-not-judgment-no-right-to-appeal-thereagainst-under-section-10-1-delhi-hc-act-1996-delhi-hc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Order closing right to lead evidence not "judgment"; no right to appeal thereagainst under Section 10 (1) Delhi HC Act, 1966: Delhi HC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court:\u00a0A Division Bench comprising of Rajendra Menon, CJ. and V. Kameshwar Rao, J. dismissed an appeal against the order of\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/25\/order-closing-right-to-lead-evidence-not-judgment-no-right-to-appeal-thereagainst-under-section-10-1-delhi-hc-act-1996-delhi-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=\"2018-10-25T06:30:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-29T05:47:26+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Delhi-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1329\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\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=\"1 minute\" \/>\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\/10\/25\/order-closing-right-to-lead-evidence-not-judgment-no-right-to-appeal-thereagainst-under-section-10-1-delhi-hc-act-1996-delhi-hc\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/25\/order-closing-right-to-lead-evidence-not-judgment-no-right-to-appeal-thereagainst-under-section-10-1-delhi-hc-act-1996-delhi-hc\/\",\"name\":\"Order closing right to lead evidence not \\\"judgment\\\"; no right to appeal thereagainst under Section 10 (1) Delhi HC Act, 1966: Delhi HC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2018-10-25T06:30:53+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-29T05:47:26+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/25\/order-closing-right-to-lead-evidence-not-judgment-no-right-to-appeal-thereagainst-under-section-10-1-delhi-hc-act-1996-delhi-hc\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/25\/order-closing-right-to-lead-evidence-not-judgment-no-right-to-appeal-thereagainst-under-section-10-1-delhi-hc-act-1996-delhi-hc\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/25\/order-closing-right-to-lead-evidence-not-judgment-no-right-to-appeal-thereagainst-under-section-10-1-delhi-hc-act-1996-delhi-hc\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Order closing right to lead evidence not “judgment”; no right to appeal thereagainst under Section 10 (1) Delhi HC Act, 1966: Delhi 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":"Order closing right to lead evidence not \"judgment\"; no right to appeal thereagainst under Section 10 (1) Delhi HC Act, 1966: Delhi 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\/10\/25\/order-closing-right-to-lead-evidence-not-judgment-no-right-to-appeal-thereagainst-under-section-10-1-delhi-hc-act-1996-delhi-hc\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Order closing right to lead evidence not \"judgment\"; no right to appeal thereagainst under Section 10 (1) Delhi HC Act, 1966: Delhi HC","og_description":"Delhi High Court:\u00a0A Division Bench comprising of Rajendra Menon, CJ. and V. Kameshwar Rao, J. dismissed an appeal against the order of","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/25\/order-closing-right-to-lead-evidence-not-judgment-no-right-to-appeal-thereagainst-under-section-10-1-delhi-hc-act-1996-delhi-hc\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-10-25T06:30:53+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-29T05:47:26+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1329,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Delhi-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/25\/order-closing-right-to-lead-evidence-not-judgment-no-right-to-appeal-thereagainst-under-section-10-1-delhi-hc-act-1996-delhi-hc\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/25\/order-closing-right-to-lead-evidence-not-judgment-no-right-to-appeal-thereagainst-under-section-10-1-delhi-hc-act-1996-delhi-hc\/","name":"Order closing right to lead evidence not \"judgment\"; no right to appeal thereagainst under Section 10 (1) Delhi HC Act, 1966: Delhi HC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2018-10-25T06:30:53+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-29T05:47:26+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/25\/order-closing-right-to-lead-evidence-not-judgment-no-right-to-appeal-thereagainst-under-section-10-1-delhi-hc-act-1996-delhi-hc\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/25\/order-closing-right-to-lead-evidence-not-judgment-no-right-to-appeal-thereagainst-under-section-10-1-delhi-hc-act-1996-delhi-hc\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/25\/order-closing-right-to-lead-evidence-not-judgment-no-right-to-appeal-thereagainst-under-section-10-1-delhi-hc-act-1996-delhi-hc\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Order closing right to lead evidence not “judgment”; no right to appeal thereagainst under Section 10 (1) Delhi HC Act, 1966: Delhi 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":216738,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/11\/jha-hc-special-leave-to-file-acquittal-appeal-cannot-be-granted-where-there-is-no-perversity-of-facts-and-law\/","url_meta":{"origin":204190,"position":0},"title":"Jha HC | Special leave to file acquittal appeal cannot be granted where there is no perversity of facts and law","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"July 11, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Jharkhand High Court: Anil Kumar Choudhary, J. disposed of an interlocutory application filed under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for special leave to file the acquittal appeal. Appellant had filed an acquittal appeal which challenged the acquittal of the accused persons in a complaint case by\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":323878,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/07\/second-appeal-fails-sikkim-hc-held-partys-willingness-to-perform-contractual-obligations-required\/","url_meta":{"origin":204190,"position":1},"title":"[Specific Performance of Contract] | Sikkim HC finds party\u2019s unwillingness for performance on their part; Discusses scope of Second Appeal under S.100 CPC","author":"Editor","date":"June 7, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Relying on UN Krishnamurthy v. AM Krishnamurthy, the Court stated that the appellant failed to indicate willingness to perform their part of the transaction, as they neither showed nor proved the availability of sufficient funds required to make the payments per the contract","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","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":216146,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/06\/27\/bom-hc-unsatisfactory-explanation-for-delay-in-recording-of-statements-of-witnesses-under-s-161-crpc-proves-fatal-to-prosecution-case-conviction-reversed\/","url_meta":{"origin":204190,"position":2},"title":"Bom HC | Unsatisfactory explanation for delay in recording of statements of witnesses under S. 161 CrPC proves fatal to prosecution case, conviction reversed","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 27, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court:\u00a0P.N. Deshmukh and Pushpa V. Ganediwala, JJ. allowed an appeal filed against the order of the Sessions Judge whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 302 IPC for murder of one Pancham (deceased). As per the prosecution case, the deceased failed to pay the loan he had taken\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":327379,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/07\/25\/does-information-seeker-have-locus-standi-in-penalty-proceedings-u-s-20-of-rti-act-delhi-hc-answers\/","url_meta":{"origin":204190,"position":3},"title":"Does information seeker have locus standi in penalty proceedings under Section 20 of RTI Act? Delhi HC answers","author":"Editor","date":"July 25, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The formation of opinion under Section 20(2) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 is in the exercise of supervisory powers of Central Information Commission and not in the exercise of the adjudicatory powers.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","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\/2024\/02\/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\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":309536,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/17\/sc-when-supreme-court-examined-proof-of-marriage-to-determine-legitimacy-of-children-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":204190,"position":4},"title":"Never Reported Judgement| When Supreme Court examined proof of marriage to determine legitimacy of children [(1952) 2 SCC 366]","author":"Editor","date":"December 17, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"This report covers the Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1952 on conclusive proof of legitimacy of children","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"proof of marriage legitimacy of children","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/proof-of-marriage-legitimacy-of-children.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/proof-of-marriage-legitimacy-of-children.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/proof-of-marriage-legitimacy-of-children.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/proof-of-marriage-legitimacy-of-children.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":220435,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/03\/pat-hc-lack-of-evidence-to-prove-injuries-sustained-by-the-deceased-court-refuses-to-convict-on-mere-statements-given-by-witnesses\/","url_meta":{"origin":204190,"position":5},"title":"Pat HC | Lack of evidence to prove injuries sustained by the deceased, Court refuses to convict on mere statements given by witnesses","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 3, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Patna High Court: The Division Bench comprising of Hemant Kumar Srivastava Prabhat Kumar Singh, JJ. dismissed an appeal on the admission stage itself since they did not find any faults in the findings of the trial court. A criminal appeal was preferred under the proviso of Section 372 of the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/204190","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=204190"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/204190\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=204190"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=204190"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=204190"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}