{"id":212117,"date":"2019-03-16T11:00:07","date_gmt":"2019-03-16T05:30:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=212117"},"modified":"2019-03-19T15:04:30","modified_gmt":"2019-03-19T09:34:30","slug":"del-hc-plea-taken-by-defendant-in-written-statement-is-wholly-irrelevant-the-stage-of-deciding-or-7-r-11-cpc-application","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/16\/del-hc-plea-taken-by-defendant-in-written-statement-is-wholly-irrelevant-the-stage-of-deciding-or-7-r-11-cpc-application\/","title":{"rendered":"Del HC | Plea taken by defendant in written statement is wholly irrelevant at the stage of deciding Or. 7 R. 11 CPC application"},"content":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court:\u00a0<\/strong>Vinod Goel, J. dismissed a petition impugning the order passed by\u00a0Civil Judge whereby defendant’s application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.<\/p>\n

The plaintiff filed a recovery suit against the defendant (petitioner) on account of selling them wooden furniture. The suit was instituted in Delhi as the plaintiff was carrying on his business of manufacturing and selling wooden items in Delhi. The defendant filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 for rejection of plaint, on the ground that the contract between the parties was entered into at Udaipur. They pleaded that the cause of action accrued at Udaipur and therefore courts in Delhi had no jurisdiction to try the suit. However, their application was rejected by the Civil Judge. Aggrieved thereby, the defendants filed the present petition.<\/p>\n

While holding that the petition was liable to be rejected, the High Court observed,\u00a0“It is a well-settled principle of law that while deciding an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, the averments made in the plaint are germane and plea taken by the defendant in the written statement would be wholly irrelevant at that stage”.\u00a0<\/strong>Reliance was placed\u00a0on\u00a0Chhotaben v. Kirtibhai Jalkrushnabhai Thakkar,\u00a0<\/em>(2018) 6 SCC 422<\/a>; Ramesh B. Desai v. Bipin Vadilal Mehta<\/em>,\u00a0<\/em>(2006) 5 SCC 638<\/a> and\u00a0Salem Bhai v. State of Maharashtra,\u00a0<\/em>(2003) 1 SCC 557<\/a>. It was noted that the plaintiff had averred in the plaint that the defendant approached him for supply wooden furniture at his office in Delhi. In reference to this, the Court stated,\u00a0“pleadings of the respondent unambiguously indicate that a part of cause of action has accrued within the local limits of Delhi which certainly provides privilege to the respondent\u00a0to file the suit in the Courts of Delhi.”\u00a0<\/strong>It was further observed that determination of jurisdiction is a mixed question of law and facts, which can be adjudicated only after the parties adduce their evidence. In such view of the matter, the Court dismissed the petition. [Hansa Place Art Furnitures (P) Ltd. v. Dilip Kumar Sharma, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 7422<\/b><\/a>, dated 25-02-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court:\u00a0Vinod Goel, J. dismissed a petition impugning the order passed by\u00a0Civil Judge whereby defendant’s application under Order 7 Rule 11 <\/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":[12171,34415,31554,33086,30796],"class_list":["post-212117","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-cause-of-action","tag-furniture","tag-order-7-rule-11-cpc","tag-pleadings","tag-written-statement"],"yoast_head":"\nDel HC | Plea taken by defendant in written statement is wholly irrelevant at the stage of deciding Or. 7 R. 11 CPC application | 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\/2019\/03\/16\/del-hc-plea-taken-by-defendant-in-written-statement-is-wholly-irrelevant-the-stage-of-deciding-or-7-r-11-cpc-application\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Del HC | Plea taken by defendant in written statement is wholly irrelevant at the stage of deciding Or. 7 R. 11 CPC application\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court:\u00a0Vinod Goel, J. dismissed a petition impugning the order passed by\u00a0Civil Judge whereby defendant’s application under Order 7 Rule 11\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/16\/del-hc-plea-taken-by-defendant-in-written-statement-is-wholly-irrelevant-the-stage-of-deciding-or-7-r-11-cpc-application\/\" \/>\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=\"2019-03-16T05:30:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-19T09:34:30+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=\"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\/2019\/03\/16\/del-hc-plea-taken-by-defendant-in-written-statement-is-wholly-irrelevant-the-stage-of-deciding-or-7-r-11-cpc-application\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/16\/del-hc-plea-taken-by-defendant-in-written-statement-is-wholly-irrelevant-the-stage-of-deciding-or-7-r-11-cpc-application\/\",\"name\":\"Del HC | Plea taken by defendant in written statement is wholly irrelevant at the stage of deciding Or. 7 R. 11 CPC application | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2019-03-16T05:30:07+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-19T09:34:30+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/16\/del-hc-plea-taken-by-defendant-in-written-statement-is-wholly-irrelevant-the-stage-of-deciding-or-7-r-11-cpc-application\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/16\/del-hc-plea-taken-by-defendant-in-written-statement-is-wholly-irrelevant-the-stage-of-deciding-or-7-r-11-cpc-application\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/16\/del-hc-plea-taken-by-defendant-in-written-statement-is-wholly-irrelevant-the-stage-of-deciding-or-7-r-11-cpc-application\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Del HC | Plea taken by defendant in written statement is wholly irrelevant at the stage of deciding Or. 7 R. 11 CPC application\"}]},{\"@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":"Del HC | Plea taken by defendant in written statement is wholly irrelevant at the stage of deciding Or. 7 R. 11 CPC application | 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\/2019\/03\/16\/del-hc-plea-taken-by-defendant-in-written-statement-is-wholly-irrelevant-the-stage-of-deciding-or-7-r-11-cpc-application\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Del HC | Plea taken by defendant in written statement is wholly irrelevant at the stage of deciding Or. 7 R. 11 CPC application","og_description":"Delhi High Court:\u00a0Vinod Goel, J. dismissed a petition impugning the order passed by\u00a0Civil Judge whereby defendant’s application under Order 7 Rule 11","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/16\/del-hc-plea-taken-by-defendant-in-written-statement-is-wholly-irrelevant-the-stage-of-deciding-or-7-r-11-cpc-application\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-03-16T05:30:07+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-19T09:34:30+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":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/16\/del-hc-plea-taken-by-defendant-in-written-statement-is-wholly-irrelevant-the-stage-of-deciding-or-7-r-11-cpc-application\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/16\/del-hc-plea-taken-by-defendant-in-written-statement-is-wholly-irrelevant-the-stage-of-deciding-or-7-r-11-cpc-application\/","name":"Del HC | Plea taken by defendant in written statement is wholly irrelevant at the stage of deciding Or. 7 R. 11 CPC application | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2019-03-16T05:30:07+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-19T09:34:30+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/16\/del-hc-plea-taken-by-defendant-in-written-statement-is-wholly-irrelevant-the-stage-of-deciding-or-7-r-11-cpc-application\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/16\/del-hc-plea-taken-by-defendant-in-written-statement-is-wholly-irrelevant-the-stage-of-deciding-or-7-r-11-cpc-application\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/16\/del-hc-plea-taken-by-defendant-in-written-statement-is-wholly-irrelevant-the-stage-of-deciding-or-7-r-11-cpc-application\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Del HC | Plea taken by defendant in written statement is wholly irrelevant at the stage of deciding Or. 7 R. 11 CPC application"}]},{"@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":379683,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/30\/del-hc-order-7-rule-11-cpc-plea-does-not-revive-ws-filing-period\/","url_meta":{"origin":212117,"position":0},"title":"Del HC: Order 7 Rule 11 application filed after expiry of statutory time doesn\u2019t revive lapsed right to file Written Statement","author":"Prarthana Gupta","date":"March 30, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cFiling of an application for rejection of plaint by Defendant 2 after lapse of statutory period for filing written statement, will not entitle Defendant 2 for grant of any extension of time for filing written statement on that ground.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Order 7 Rule 11 CPC","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Order-7-Rule-11-CPC.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Order-7-Rule-11-CPC.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Order-7-Rule-11-CPC.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Order-7-Rule-11-CPC.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":203212,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/06\/court-free-to-invoke-provisions-of-order-8-rule-10-cpc-if-defendant-fails-to-file-ws-permanent-injunction-granted-against-use-of-trademark-cbn-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":212117,"position":1},"title":"Court free to invoke provisions of Order 8 Rule 10 CPC if defendant fails to file WS; permanent injunction granted against use of trademark CBN NEWS","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 6, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Jayant Nath, J. decreed a suit for permanent injunction by invoking the provisions of Order 8 Rule 10 CPC. The plaintiff was involved in broadcasting activities such as news reporting, producing TV shows and other media content in various parts of\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":304376,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/11\/dhc-irrefutable-proof-of-disobedience-required-for-punitive-action-under-order-39-rule-2a-of-cpc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":212117,"position":2},"title":"Court cannot presume disobedience; strict and irrefutable proof of disobedience required for punitive action under Order 39 Rule 2A of CPC: Delhi High Court","author":"Editor","date":"October 11, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIn its zeal to ensure implementation of rule of law, the court cannot hold a person guilty of violation of its orders and proceed punitively against him merely because the circumstances give rise to a strong suspicion of the court\u2019s order been disobeyed.\u201d","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\/2023\/10\/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\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":312058,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/24\/cal-hc-criticises-trial-court-for-allowing-counter-claim-post-filing-of-written-statement-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":212117,"position":3},"title":"Calcutta High Court criticises trial court for allowing Counter-Claim after filing of written statement","author":"Ritu","date":"January 24, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Calcutta High Court highlighted the importance of adhering to the legislative intent behind Rule 6A of Order 8 CPC to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and ensure speedy trial.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-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\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":366581,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/13\/rejection-plaint-application-of-mind-non-disclosure-of-cause-of-action-jk-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":212117,"position":4},"title":"\u2018Rejection of Plaint requires attentive application of mind, not routine action\u2019: J&K & Ladakh HC upholds Trial Court order for Non-Disclosure of Cause of Action","author":"Editor","date":"November 13, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe essence of an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC to terminate a civil action or to put an end to a litigation is an essential duty of a Civil Court so that further judicial time is not invested wastefully.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"rejection of plaint","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/rejection-of-plaint.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/rejection-of-plaint.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/rejection-of-plaint.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/rejection-of-plaint.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":195994,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/12\/maximum-period-of-90-days-to-file-a-written-statement-as-prescribed-under-cpc-is-to-be-extended-only-in-exceptional-cases\/","url_meta":{"origin":212117,"position":5},"title":"Maximum period of 90 days to file a written statement as prescribed under CPC is to be extended only in exceptional cases","author":"Saba","date":"May 12, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Hyderabad High Court: A revision petition filed against the order of the Principal Junior Civil Judge whereby he rejected the I.A filed by the petitioner herein, was allowed by M.S. Ramchandra Rao, J. Brief facts of the case were that the respondent (original plaintiff) filed a writ against the petitioner\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\/212117","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=212117"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/212117\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=212117"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=212117"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=212117"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}