{"id":258503,"date":"2021-12-15T09:00:11","date_gmt":"2021-12-15T03:30:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=258503"},"modified":"2021-12-24T10:46:50","modified_gmt":"2021-12-24T05:16:50","slug":"doctrine-of-substantive-representation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/15\/doctrine-of-substantive-representation\/","title":{"rendered":"Doctrine of Substantive Representation: Can it be applied where all respondents were not present, but main contesting parties were represented? Ori HC discusses"},"content":{"rendered":"

Orissa High Court: <\/strong>The Division Bench of Dr S. Muralidhar, CJ and A.K. Mohapatra, J., partly allowed an appeal filed in a property dispute, after applying the doctrine of substantive representation.<\/p>\n

The instant appeal was directed against the decision of the Single Judge.<\/p>\n

Background<\/span><\/h4>\n

The facts of the present matter were that Baina and Dayanidhi Ghose were the two children of the second wife of the son of late Nandi Ghose who was the common ancestor. Of the two sons Pahali and Dhinu, the latter branch was extinct. Pahali had two wives. Ganesh was the son of the first wife and Baina (Defendant 1), Nandu and Dayanidhi (the plaintiff) were the children of the second wife. Ganesh died leaving four sons Abhinash, Krutibash, Kailash and Srinibas.<\/p>\n

Further, it was stated that Kailash died leaving behind his widow Dhira, defendant 5 and daughter Jema (defendant 6). Baina\u2019s sons were defendants 7, 8, 9 and 10. Nandu died leaving his wife Padmabati, who also died and therefore Nandu\u2019s branch had become extinct.<\/p>\n

Hence, the dispute was between the plaintiff\/appellant on the one hand i.e., defendants\/respondents 1 and 7 to 10 on the other hand.<\/p>\n

Plaintiff-appellant stated that in an earlier partition, Ganesh took Ac 4.40 dec of land and was separated from the joint family.<\/p>\n

Property described in Schedule \u2018Kha\u2019 of the plaint were ancestral and those in \u201cGa\u201d were the properties acquired in the name of defendant 1 as Karta of the joint family out of the joint family nucleus.<\/p>\n

Earlier, Padmabati, widow of Nandu had filed a partition suit and by compromise, the suit was decreed.<\/p>\n

Plaintiff\u2019s case was that Defendant 1 Baina Ghose had obtained a deed of partition dated 27th March 1962 under which he allegedly took a larger share than what he was entitled to. It was alleged that land of an area of Ac 10.00 which was the joint family property was left out of the partition deed. Plaintiff was allotted Ac13.00 dec of land in Schedule \u2018Kha\u2019 and \u2018Ga\u2019 Schedule property of Ac 4.00 was kept joint.<\/p>\n

Trial Court upheld the validity of the partition deed. \u2018Ga\u2019 schedule properties having been kept joint under the partition deed were directed to be partitioned.<\/p>\n

Single Judge also held that \u2018Ga\u2019 Schedule properties were the self-acquired properties of Defendant.1 in which the Plaintiff has no share. Accordingly, the first appeal was dismissed.<\/em><\/p>\n

Questions for Consideration<\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n

Whether the First Appellate Court was right in holding \u2018Ga\u2019 Schedule properties to be the self-acquired properties of defendant 1?<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law and Decision<\/span><\/h4>\n

High Court noted that although several of the parties, even some of those brought on record as legal representatives have themselves expired and have had to be substituted, the LRs of the main contesting parties viz., sons of appellants 1,2 and 3 and daughter (appellant 4)\u00a0 and the LRs of Baina Ghose, the main contesting defendant have been on record.<\/p>\n

Theory of \u2018substantive representation\u2019 was explained in this Court\u2019s decision of Sarat Chandra Deb v. Bichitrananda Sahoo, <\/em>AIR 1951 Ori 212, where it was held that:<\/p>\n

\u201c\u2026once the representation was proper, the decree was binding and could not be reopened.\u201d<\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

In the present matter,<\/p>\n

while all the LRs\/all the Respondents may not be present in these proceedings, since the main contesting parties in the suit are represented in the Court applies the doctrine of substantive representation and proceeds with the hearing of the appeal.<\/em><\/p>\n

Bench accepted the plea that the Single Judge ought not to have held the property Schedule \u2018Ga\u2019 to be the self-acquired property of the original defendant. Once it was clear that the properties in \u2018Ga\u2019 were to be apportioned between the parties i.e. between two brothers, it was incumbent on the Single Judge to have acknowledged that position and not framed an issue.<\/p>\n

Hence, appeal was partly allowed by clarifying that the properties in \u2018Ga\u2019 will be treated as a joint and be partitioned between two main contesting parties and their respective LRs. [Hatanagar Ghose v. Durgamani Ghose, 2021 SCC OnLine Ori 2078<\/b><\/a>, decided on 5-11-2021]<\/p>\n

\n

Advocates before the Court:<\/strong><\/p>\n

For the appellants: Mr Avijit Pal, Advocate<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Orissa High Court: The Division Bench of Dr S. Muralidhar, CJ and A.K. Mohapatra, J., partly allowed an appeal filed in a <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"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":[48047,48048,45418,37146,48046,31861],"class_list":["post-258503","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-acquired-property","tag-doctrine-of-substantive-representation","tag-joint-family-property","tag-orissa-high-court","tag-partitioned-property","tag-suit"],"yoast_head":"\nDoctrine of Substantive Representation: Can it be applied where all respondents were not present, but main contesting parties were represented? Ori HC discusses | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Doctrine of Substantive Representation\" \/>\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\/12\/15\/doctrine-of-substantive-representation\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Doctrine of Substantive Representation: Can it be applied where all respondents were not present, but main contesting parties were represented? Ori HC discusses\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Doctrine of Substantive Representation\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/15\/doctrine-of-substantive-representation\/\" \/>\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=\"2021-12-15T03:30:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-12-24T05:16:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/04\/orissa-high-court.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=\"3 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\/12\/15\/doctrine-of-substantive-representation\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/15\/doctrine-of-substantive-representation\/\",\"name\":\"Doctrine of Substantive Representation: Can it be applied where all respondents were not present, but main contesting parties were represented? Ori HC discusses | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-12-15T03:30:11+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-12-24T05:16:50+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"description\":\"Doctrine of Substantive Representation\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/15\/doctrine-of-substantive-representation\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/15\/doctrine-of-substantive-representation\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/15\/doctrine-of-substantive-representation\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Doctrine of Substantive Representation: Can it be applied where all respondents were not present, but main contesting parties were represented? Ori HC discusses\"}]},{\"@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":"Doctrine of Substantive Representation: Can it be applied where all respondents were not present, but main contesting parties were represented? Ori HC discusses | SCC Times","description":"Doctrine of Substantive Representation","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\/12\/15\/doctrine-of-substantive-representation\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Doctrine of Substantive Representation: Can it be applied where all respondents were not present, but main contesting parties were represented? Ori HC discusses","og_description":"Doctrine of Substantive Representation","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/15\/doctrine-of-substantive-representation\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-12-15T03:30:11+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-12-24T05:16:50+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/04\/orissa-high-court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/15\/doctrine-of-substantive-representation\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/15\/doctrine-of-substantive-representation\/","name":"Doctrine of Substantive Representation: Can it be applied where all respondents were not present, but main contesting parties were represented? Ori HC discusses | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-12-15T03:30:11+00:00","dateModified":"2021-12-24T05:16:50+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"description":"Doctrine of Substantive Representation","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/15\/doctrine-of-substantive-representation\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/15\/doctrine-of-substantive-representation\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/15\/doctrine-of-substantive-representation\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Doctrine of Substantive Representation: Can it be applied where all respondents were not present, but main contesting parties were represented? Ori HC discusses"}]},{"@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":288750,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/07\/estoppel-not-granted-to-student-having-knowledge-of-failure-in-exam-orissa-hc-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":258503,"position":0},"title":"Promissory estoppel inapplicable in a situation where a student has knowledge about failure in examination: Orissa HC holds \u2018Charan Panda case\u2019 to be bad in law","author":"Editor","date":"April 7, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Orissa High Court said that it is no doubt true that the Courts have, more often than not, leaned in favour of the students, but as the things stand, a line must be drawn between cases where there have been a bona fide error and cases where the circumstances are\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Orissa High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-508.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-508.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-508.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-508.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":267646,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/31\/ap-hc-discussed-the-enforceability-of-arbitration-clause-embedded-in-an-unstamped-charter-party\/","url_meta":{"origin":258503,"position":1},"title":"[Doctrine of Separability] AP HC discussed the enforceability of arbitration clause embedded in an unstamped charter party\/agreement","author":"Editor","date":"May 31, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Andhra Pradesh High Court: A Division Bench of Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ and M Satyanarayan Murthy, J. dismissed the appeal being devoid of merits. The facts of the case are such that the petitioner (respondent herein) is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, carrying on shipping business known as\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\/2019\/04\/Andhra-Pradesh-High-Court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/Andhra-Pradesh-High-Court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/Andhra-Pradesh-High-Court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/Andhra-Pradesh-High-Court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/Andhra-Pradesh-High-Court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":240032,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/02\/legitimate-expectations-evolution-and-application-of-the-doctrine-in-india-and-how-is-it-different-from-promissory-estoppel-as-explained-by-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":258503,"position":2},"title":"Legitimate expectations: Evolution and application of the doctrine in India and how is it different from promissory estoppel as explained by Supreme Court","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"December 2, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In the case where the Jharkhand Government had failed to give effect to the Industrial Policy and subsequent Notification that promised 50% rebate to Industrial Units on electricity duty, the Dr. DY Chandrachud* and Indu Malhotra, JJ took the opportunity to explain the evolution and application 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":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-07-2.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-07-2.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-07-2.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-07-2.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-07-2.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":6164,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/04\/arbitration-and-conciliation-act-1996-pt-i-or-pt-ii-doctrine-of-severability-2\/","url_meta":{"origin":258503,"position":3},"title":"Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 Pt. I or Pt. II \u2014 Doctrine of severability","author":"Sucheta","date":"September 4, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Cases Reported in 2014 SCC Vol. 7 August 28, 2014 Part 4Law of substantive contract does not determine law of arbitration agreement\/lex arbitri. Parties are entitled to agree that law of one country would govern substantive contract and laws of another country would apply to arbitration agreement. Parties can also\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "SCC Weekly"","block_context":{"text":"SCC Weekly","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/supremecourtcases\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":6218,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/04\/arbitration-and-conciliation-act-1996-pt-i-or-pt-ii-doctrine-of-severability\/","url_meta":{"origin":258503,"position":4},"title":"Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 Pt. I or Pt. II \u2014 Doctrine of severability","author":"Sucheta","date":"September 4, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Cases Reported in 2014 SCC Vol. 7 August 28, 2014 Part 4Law of substantive contract does not determine law of arbitration agreement\/lex arbitri. Parties are entitled to agree that law of one country would govern substantive contract and laws of another country would apply to arbitration agreement. Parties can also\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Alternate Dispute Resolution"","block_context":{"text":"Alternate Dispute Resolution","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/alternate_dispute_resolution\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":26312,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/11\/17\/articles-published-in-2015-scc-vol-9-october-28-2015-part-2\/","url_meta":{"origin":258503,"position":5},"title":"Articles published in 2015 SCC Vol. 9 October 28, 2015 Part 2","author":"Sucheta","date":"November 17, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court \u2014 Jurisdiction, Problem of Pendence by Justice J. Chelameswar, (2015) 9 SCC (J-1): In this article, author attempts to identify the reasons for problem of pendency in Supreme Court and suggest some possible solutions for the reduction of the pendency as well as the reduction of the time\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/258503","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=258503"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/258503\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=258503"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=258503"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=258503"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}