{"id":216884,"date":"2019-07-16T09:30:06","date_gmt":"2019-07-16T04:00:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=216884"},"modified":"2019-07-18T16:25:56","modified_gmt":"2019-07-18T10:55:56","slug":"bom-hc-finding-of-fact-recorded-by-arbitrator-which-is-patently-illegal-is-open-to-challenge-under-s-34-of-ac-act","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/16\/bom-hc-finding-of-fact-recorded-by-arbitrator-which-is-patently-illegal-is-open-to-challenge-under-s-34-of-ac-act\/","title":{"rendered":"Bom HC | Finding of fact recorded by Arbitrator which is patently illegal is open to challenge under S. 34 of A&C Act"},"content":{"rendered":"

Bombay High Court:\u00a0<\/strong>C.V. Bhadang, J. allowed an appeal filed against the decision of the District Judge whereby he had dismissed appellant’s petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.<\/p>\n

The appellant had filed the said petition under Section 34 against the award of the Arbitrator made in the subject arbitration proceedings between the appellant and the respondent. The Arbitrator had rejected the counter claim filed by the appellant. The District Magistrate refused to consider some of the aspects challenged by the appellant on the ground that those were only findings of facts recorded by the Arbitrator and in the result dismissed his petition. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant filed the present appeal under Section 37.<\/p>\n

S.D. Padiyar, Advocate representing for the appellant contended that the findings recorded by the Arbitrator were perverse and liable to set aside. Per contra, A.D. Bhobe, representing the respondent supported the impugned decision.<\/p>\n

Relying on\u00a0Mahendra Kumar v. State of M.P.,\u00a0<\/em>(1987) 3 SCC 265<\/a>, the High Court observed that\u00a0Order 8 Rule 6-A CPC does not bar the filing of the counter claim by the defendants after filing of the written statement and the counter claim can be filed after delivery of defence provided that the cause of action for the same has accrued prior to such delivery of defence.\u00a0<\/em>Therefore, the Court held that it could not be disputed that the cause of action for the counter claim by the appellant seeking compensation in respect of the LPG cylinders and the pressure regulators which were found missing had arisen prior to the delivery of defence and, thus, on this ground, the counter claim could not have been dismissed.<\/p>\n

Regarding the issue of consideration of finding of facts, the Judge relied on\u00a0Associates Builders v. DDA, <\/em>(2015) 3 SCC 49<\/a>, observed:\u00a0“I am conscious of the legal position that a finding of fact properly recorded by the Arbitrator is not open to challenge in the limited supervisory role attributed to the Court under Section 34 of the Act and much less in a further appeal under Section 37 of the Act. However, if the finding recorded is patently illegal and perverse where the Arbitrator has refused to acknowledge the material on record, the same, in my considered view, would be open to challenge as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Associate Builders.”<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

In the present case, it was found that one of the issues, the Arbitrator failed to take note of the documents produced even though he had acted upon the same in the earlier part of the award. Relying further on Mc Dermott International Inc. v. Burn Standard Co. Ltd.<\/em>, (2006) 11 SCC 181<\/a> for the proposition that the Court in the exercise of the jurisdiction under Section 34 cannot substitute or modify the award, the High Court quashed the award passed by the arbitrator while allowing the appeal. [Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. Anuradha Ajit Malgaonkar, 2019 SCC OnLine Bom 1244<\/b><\/a>, decided on 04-07-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Bombay High Court:\u00a0C.V. Bhadang, J. allowed an appeal filed against the decision of the District Judge whereby he had dismissed appellant’s petition <\/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":[17711,36625,36627,36626],"class_list":["post-216884","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-arbitrator","tag-finding-fact","tag-patently-illegal","tag-section-34-of-arbitration-and-concilliation-act"],"yoast_head":"\nBom HC | Finding of fact recorded by Arbitrator which is patently illegal is open to challenge under S. 34 of A&C Act | 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\/07\/16\/bom-hc-finding-of-fact-recorded-by-arbitrator-which-is-patently-illegal-is-open-to-challenge-under-s-34-of-ac-act\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bom HC | Finding of fact recorded by Arbitrator which is patently illegal is open to challenge under S. 34 of A&C Act\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Bombay High Court:\u00a0C.V. Bhadang, J. allowed an appeal filed against the decision of the District Judge whereby he had dismissed appellant’s petition\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/16\/bom-hc-finding-of-fact-recorded-by-arbitrator-which-is-patently-illegal-is-open-to-challenge-under-s-34-of-ac-act\/\" \/>\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=\"2019-07-16T04:00:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-07-18T10:55:56+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/02\/goabombayhighcourt1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"768\" \/>\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\/07\/16\/bom-hc-finding-of-fact-recorded-by-arbitrator-which-is-patently-illegal-is-open-to-challenge-under-s-34-of-ac-act\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/16\/bom-hc-finding-of-fact-recorded-by-arbitrator-which-is-patently-illegal-is-open-to-challenge-under-s-34-of-ac-act\/\",\"name\":\"Bom HC | Finding of fact recorded by Arbitrator which is patently illegal is open to challenge under S. 34 of A&C Act | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2019-07-16T04:00:06+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-07-18T10:55:56+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/16\/bom-hc-finding-of-fact-recorded-by-arbitrator-which-is-patently-illegal-is-open-to-challenge-under-s-34-of-ac-act\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/16\/bom-hc-finding-of-fact-recorded-by-arbitrator-which-is-patently-illegal-is-open-to-challenge-under-s-34-of-ac-act\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/16\/bom-hc-finding-of-fact-recorded-by-arbitrator-which-is-patently-illegal-is-open-to-challenge-under-s-34-of-ac-act\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bom HC | Finding of fact recorded by Arbitrator which is patently illegal is open to challenge under S. 34 of A&C Act\"}]},{\"@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":"Bom HC | Finding of fact recorded by Arbitrator which is patently illegal is open to challenge under S. 34 of A&C Act | 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\/07\/16\/bom-hc-finding-of-fact-recorded-by-arbitrator-which-is-patently-illegal-is-open-to-challenge-under-s-34-of-ac-act\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bom HC | Finding of fact recorded by Arbitrator which is patently illegal is open to challenge under S. 34 of A&C Act","og_description":"Bombay High Court:\u00a0C.V. Bhadang, J. allowed an appeal filed against the decision of the District Judge whereby he had dismissed appellant’s petition","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/16\/bom-hc-finding-of-fact-recorded-by-arbitrator-which-is-patently-illegal-is-open-to-challenge-under-s-34-of-ac-act\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-07-16T04:00:06+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-07-18T10:55:56+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":768,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/02\/goabombayhighcourt1.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\/07\/16\/bom-hc-finding-of-fact-recorded-by-arbitrator-which-is-patently-illegal-is-open-to-challenge-under-s-34-of-ac-act\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/16\/bom-hc-finding-of-fact-recorded-by-arbitrator-which-is-patently-illegal-is-open-to-challenge-under-s-34-of-ac-act\/","name":"Bom HC | Finding of fact recorded by Arbitrator which is patently illegal is open to challenge under S. 34 of A&C Act | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2019-07-16T04:00:06+00:00","dateModified":"2019-07-18T10:55:56+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/16\/bom-hc-finding-of-fact-recorded-by-arbitrator-which-is-patently-illegal-is-open-to-challenge-under-s-34-of-ac-act\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/16\/bom-hc-finding-of-fact-recorded-by-arbitrator-which-is-patently-illegal-is-open-to-challenge-under-s-34-of-ac-act\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/16\/bom-hc-finding-of-fact-recorded-by-arbitrator-which-is-patently-illegal-is-open-to-challenge-under-s-34-of-ac-act\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bom HC | Finding of fact recorded by Arbitrator which is patently illegal is open to challenge under S. 34 of A&C Act"}]},{"@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":259649,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/07\/explained-can-an-award-be-remitted-to-the-arbitrator-in-absence-of-findings-on-the-contentious-issues\/","url_meta":{"origin":216884,"position":0},"title":"Explained| Can An Award Be Remitted To The Arbitrator In Absence Of Findings On The Contentious Issues?","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"January 7, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Explaining the provision of remission under Section 34 (4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the bench of R. Subhash Reddy* and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ has held that under guise of additional reasons and filling up the gaps in the reasoning, no award can be remitted to\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\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-21.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-21.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-21.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-21.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-21.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":210176,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/02\/18\/ker-hc-designation-of-seat-of-arbitration-in-an-agreement-is-akin-to-an-exclusive-jurisdiction-clause\/","url_meta":{"origin":216884,"position":1},"title":"Ker HC | Designation of seat of arbitration in an agreement is akin to an exclusive jurisdiction clause","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 18, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court: The Division Bench of V. Chitambaresh and R. Narayana Pisharadi, JJ. dismissed an appeal filed against the order of District Judge refusing to entertain a petition challenging arbitral award. Appellant was a guarantor to the loan availed of by a company named Anugraha Wood Products Limited from\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":217596,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/03\/utt-hc-once-the-arbitrator-applies-his-mind-to-matter-before-him-court-should-not-reappraise-the-matter-as-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed\/","url_meta":{"origin":216884,"position":2},"title":"Utt HC | Once the arbitrator applies his mind to matter before him, Court should not reappraise the matter as in appeal; Appeal dismissed","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 3, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Uttaranchal High Court: Manoj K. Tiwari, J. decided the Appeal filed against the order of the District Judge in an Arbitration case. The facts giving rise to the instant appeal are that, the appellant raised an objection under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which was duly\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":284055,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/16\/delhi-high-court-upholds-arbitral-award-as-reappreciation-of-evidence-is-beyond-the-scope-of-section-37-arbitration-act-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/","url_meta":{"origin":216884,"position":3},"title":"Delhi High Court finds no ground for interference as reappreciation of evidence is beyond the scope of Section 37 Arbitration Act","author":"Editor","date":"February 16, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The scope of a challenge under Section 34 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and Section 37 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 is limited to the grounds stipulated in Section 34 Arbitration Act.","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\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":354442,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/24\/ori-hc-on-scope-judicial-intervention-sections-34-37-arbitration-conciliation-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":216884,"position":4},"title":"Orissa HC explains the scope of judicial intervention under Ss. 34 and 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996","author":"Editor","date":"July 24, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe scope of Section 34 review, though narrow, does permit the court to excise patently illegal portions of an award, even if a granular item-by-item objection was not pleaded, so long as the broad ground was raised and both parties had opportunity to address.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Scope of Judicial Intervention under Arbitration Act","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Scope-of-Judicial-Intervention-under-Arbitration-Act.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Scope-of-Judicial-Intervention-under-Arbitration-Act.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Scope-of-Judicial-Intervention-under-Arbitration-Act.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Scope-of-Judicial-Intervention-under-Arbitration-Act.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":242212,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/01\/13\/ker-hc-powers-of-court-under-s-34-of-the-arbitration-act-1996-are-merely-supervisory-in-nature-court-cannot-correct-errors-from-the-order-of-arbitrator-but-can-only-quash-it-hc-explains\/","url_meta":{"origin":216884,"position":5},"title":"Ker HC | Powers of Court under S. 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 are merely supervisory in nature; Court cannot correct errors from the order of Arbitrator, but can only quash it: HC explains","author":"Editor","date":"January 13, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court: The Division Bench of C.T. Ravikumar and K. Haripal, JJ., partially allowed the instant appeal challenging the correctness of the orders of the District Judge whereby the District Judge had declined to interfere with the arbitral award. Properties of the appellants were acquired by the National Highway\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\/216884","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=216884"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/216884\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=216884"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=216884"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=216884"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}