{"id":245147,"date":"2021-03-06T13:00:37","date_gmt":"2021-03-06T07:30:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=245147"},"modified":"2021-03-12T11:10:22","modified_gmt":"2021-03-12T05:40:22","slug":"written-statement","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/06\/written-statement\/","title":{"rendered":"Kar HC | Addition of a new ground of defence or substituting or altering defence or taking inconsistent pleas in written statement would not be objectionable, while adding, altering or substituting a new cause of action in the plaint may be objectionable"},"content":{"rendered":"

Karnataka High Court:<\/strong> Krishna S. Dixit J. set aside the impugned order and allowed the petition.<\/p>\n

The facts of the case are such that the petitioner has filed the instant suit for declaration and injunction for assailing the order rejecting the application filed under Order VI Rule 17 Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 declining leave to amend the plaint for introducing the ground of \u201ceasement of necessity\u201d in terms of Section 13 of the Easements Act, 1882.<\/p>\n

Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the suit is for declaration and injunction concerning the right of way which is a public way and the respondent should not interfere with the same. It was further submitted that what is sought to be introduced by way of amendment to the plaint is only the ground of easement of necessity; thus the nature of the suit does not much change and any amendment would inevitably cause some change but what the courts need to see is the enormity of change and the consequent amount of prejudice that the other side would suffer which in this case would be insubstantial in nature.<\/p>\n

Counsel for the respondents submitted that the amendment if sanctioned would amount to permitting the plaintiff to take up inconsistent plea which the law frowns.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that the principle of inconsistent pleas as argued by the respondents, i.e. the first contention regarding the public way and the other contention regarding the easement of necessity would tantamount to a contra plea, does not merit acceptance as Section 13 of the Act which enacts the easement of necessity presupposes dominant heritage on one and the servient heritage of another even then there is nothing repugnant in a public way becoming a dominant heritage. It was also observed that the impugned order of the kind is treated as a discretionary one and some prejudice is being caused to the respondents by petitioner amendment of the plaint, it is tritely said that there is no prejudice to a party which cannot be compensated.<\/p>\n

The Court thus held that the \u201cleave is accorded for amending the plaint subject to she paying the cost of Rs. 5000\/- to the respondent within three weeks.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

In view of the above, the petition was allowed.[M.P. Puttamma v. V. Chittibabu, 2021 SCC OnLine Kar 444<\/b><\/a> , decided on 05-02-2021]<\/p>\n

\n

Arunima Bose, Editorial Assistant has put this story together.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Karnataka High Court: Krishna S. Dixit J. set aside the impugned order and allowed the petition. The facts of the case are <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[12171,45393,45320,29785,31861,30796],"class_list":["post-245147","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-cause-of-action","tag-dominant-heritage","tag-easements-act","tag-law","tag-suit","tag-written-statement"],"yoast_head":"\nKar HC | Addition of a new ground of defence or substituting or altering defence or taking inconsistent pleas in written statement would not be objectionable, while adding, altering or substituting a new cause of action in the plaint may be objectionable | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Written Statement\" \/>\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\/2021\/03\/06\/written-statement\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kar HC | Addition of a new ground of defence or substituting or altering defence or taking inconsistent pleas in written statement would not be objectionable, while adding, altering or substituting a new cause of action in the plaint may be objectionable\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Written Statement\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/06\/written-statement\/\" \/>\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=\"2021-03-06T07:30:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-03-12T05:40:22+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/02\/IMG_3499-e1487871967209.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=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\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\/2021\/03\/06\/written-statement\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/06\/written-statement\/\",\"name\":\"Kar HC | Addition of a new ground of defence or substituting or altering defence or taking inconsistent pleas in written statement would not be objectionable, while adding, altering or substituting a new cause of action in the plaint may be objectionable | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-03-06T07:30:37+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-03-12T05:40:22+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Written Statement\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/06\/written-statement\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/06\/written-statement\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/06\/written-statement\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kar HC | Addition of a new ground of defence or substituting or altering defence or taking inconsistent pleas in written statement would not be objectionable, while adding, altering or substituting a new cause of action in the plaint may be objectionable\"}]},{\"@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\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Kar HC | Addition of a new ground of defence or substituting or altering defence or taking inconsistent pleas in written statement would not be objectionable, while adding, altering or substituting a new cause of action in the plaint may be objectionable | SCC Times","description":"Written Statement","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\/2021\/03\/06\/written-statement\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kar HC | Addition of a new ground of defence or substituting or altering defence or taking inconsistent pleas in written statement would not be objectionable, while adding, altering or substituting a new cause of action in the plaint may be objectionable","og_description":"Written Statement","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/06\/written-statement\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-03-06T07:30:37+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-03-12T05:40:22+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/02\/IMG_3499-e1487871967209.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/06\/written-statement\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/06\/written-statement\/","name":"Kar HC | Addition of a new ground of defence or substituting or altering defence or taking inconsistent pleas in written statement would not be objectionable, while adding, altering or substituting a new cause of action in the plaint may be objectionable | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-03-06T07:30:37+00:00","dateModified":"2021-03-12T05:40:22+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Written Statement","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/06\/written-statement\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/06\/written-statement\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/06\/written-statement\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kar HC | Addition of a new ground of defence or substituting or altering defence or taking inconsistent pleas in written statement would not be objectionable, while adding, altering or substituting a new cause of action in the plaint may be objectionable"}]},{"@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\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":281625,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/14\/set-aside-order-of-trial-court-while-rejecting-husbands-plaint-for-declaration-of-divorce-decree-upon-pronouncement-triple-talaq-legal-news-legal-reseach-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":245147,"position":0},"title":"Supreme Court's Triple Talaq judgment applies retrospectively; Andhra Pradesh High Court rejects husband's suit for decree of divorce","author":"Editor","date":"January 14, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cBy the time the judgment is proposed to be rendered on such a plaint, the law available for the Court would be that there was no Triple Talaq. Therefore, the view of the trial Court that the ratio in Shayara Banu's case (supra) is not applicable retrospectively is incorrect.\u201d observed\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Andhra Pradesh High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-491.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":290829,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/28\/explained-supreme-court-verdict-on-application-of-principle-of-res-judicata-and-other-cpc-provisions-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":245147,"position":1},"title":"Explained| Supreme Court judgment on application of principle of Res Judicata and other CPC provisions","author":"Apoorva","date":"April 28, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Supreme Court said that before examining the defendants\u2019 ground of res judicata to oppose the eviction petition, several aspects may have to be looked into, like whether such an issue was substantively at issue in the previous suit and similar such other questions may crop up.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"latest judgement of supreme court on res judicata","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/latest-judgement-of-supreme-court-on-res-judicata.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/latest-judgement-of-supreme-court-on-res-judicata.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/latest-judgement-of-supreme-court-on-res-judicata.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/latest-judgement-of-supreme-court-on-res-judicata.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":311817,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/19\/calcutta-high-court-dismisses-claim-of-collusion-and-fraud-asserts-trial-court-as-appropriate-venue-for-adjudication-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":245147,"position":2},"title":"Calcutta High Court dismisses Revisional Application on claim of collusion and fraud; Case to proceed for Trial","author":"Ritu","date":"January 19, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Calcutta High Court clarified that rejection of the plaint is not warranted based on allegations of collusion or lack of cause of action, which are factual issues to be determined during the 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":251632,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/07\/23\/rejection-of-suit\/","url_meta":{"origin":245147,"position":3},"title":"Are Courts empowered to grant time to rectify defects in plaint where the plaint had been rejected under Or. 7 R. 11(d)? SC clarifies","author":"Editor","date":"July 23, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The Division Bench of Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud* and M R Shah, JJ., affirmed the judgment of Bombay High Court wherein the Single Judge had held that where the suit appears from the statements in the plaint to be barred by any law, the defects are not curable. Background\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\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":201663,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/11\/application-for-amendment-of-plaint-on-basis-of-undisclosed-hand-written-declarations-not-allowed\/","url_meta":{"origin":245147,"position":4},"title":"Application for amendment of plaint on basis of undisclosed hand written declarations not allowed","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 11, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Ashis Kumar Chakraborty, J. allowed a challenge to the order passed by Additional District Judge whereby he allowed an amendment application filed by the husband in a matrimonial suit. The husband filed the application for amending the plaint on the basis\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\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":326306,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/07\/11\/madras-hc-dismisses-nityanandha-swami-plea-against-substituting-head-madurai-aadheenam-2012-suit\/","url_meta":{"origin":245147,"position":5},"title":"Read why Madras HC dismissed Nityanandha Swami’s plea against substituting head of Madurai Aadheenam in 2012 suit","author":"Apoorva","date":"July 11, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court said that whether the documents executed by 292nd pontiff are liable to be declared as null and void or whether the appointment of Sri Harihara as the 293rd pontiff is valid or not have to be decided by the Trial Court","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madras High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-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\/Madras-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Madras-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/245147","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\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=245147"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/245147\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=245147"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=245147"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=245147"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}