{"id":135837,"date":"2009-04-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-04-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009"},"modified":"2017-12-05T04:01:56","modified_gmt":"2017-12-04T22:31:56","slug":"kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009","title":{"rendered":"Kumaran vs Maman on 2 April, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Kumaran vs Maman on 2 April, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nRSA.No. 1039 of 2004(F)\n\n\n1. KUMARAN, S\/O. MATTAYI NARAYANAN,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. JANAKI, D\/O. DO. IN  DO.  DO.\n3. VALLI, D\/O. DO.  IN DO.  DO.\n4. LAKSHMI, D\/O.  DO.  IN DO.  DO.\n5. DEVAKI, D\/O.  DO.  IN DO.  DO.\n6. VASANTHA, D\/O. DO. IN   DO.  DO.\n7. SANTHAKUMARI, D\/O. VELU,  DO.  DO.\n8. MEENAKSHI, W\/O. MATTAYI NARAYANAN,\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. MAMAN, S\/O. KAVULIYALUKKAL KARAPPAN,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. KRISHNAN, S\/O. MATTAYI NARAYANAN,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER (SR.)\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.K.RAMACHANDRAN\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.P.BALACHANDRAN\n\n Dated :02\/04\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n               K.P.BALACHANDRAN, J.\n           ------------------------------------------------\n           I. A. Nos.2118 of 2008, 2119 of 2008,\n            C. M. Application No.718 of 2008 &amp;\n                  R. S. A. No.1039 of 2004\n           ------------------------------------------------\n            Dated this the 2nd day of April, 2009\n\n                          JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>    These   are        applications                filed    by the<\/p>\n<p>appellants to implead the LRs of deceased<\/p>\n<p>first respondent as additional respondents 3<\/p>\n<p>to 11 setting aside abatement condoning delay<\/p>\n<p>of 590 days in filing application to set aside<\/p>\n<p>abatement.\n<\/p>\n<p>    2. Additional respondents 3, 4 and 6<\/p>\n<p>sought to be impleaded have filed objection<\/p>\n<p>objecting to the impleadment setting aside<\/p>\n<p>abatement condoning the delay. The objection<\/p>\n<p>is that the reasons stated for condonation of<\/p>\n<p>delay is that the appellants were not aware of<\/p>\n<p>the necessity of impleading legal representatives<\/p>\n<p>of the deceased first respondent though the<\/p>\n<p>first respondent died on 21\/09\/06 and that<\/p>\n<p>only on receipt of intimation from counsel to<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">R. S. A. No.1039 of 2004        -2-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>         furnish details of the legal representatives<\/p>\n<p>         for impleadment, he became aware that the LRs<\/p>\n<p>         are to be impleaded and that it took some time<\/p>\n<p>         to collect the details of the numerous legal<\/p>\n<p>         representatives and that therefore, the delay<\/p>\n<p>         be condoned. According to the respondents,<\/p>\n<p>         their ignorance of law and procedure is not a<\/p>\n<p>         ground to condone the delay and to set aside<\/p>\n<p>         the abatement.\n<\/p>\n<p>                3. It is seen that the deceased first<\/p>\n<p>         respondent is the sole defendant in the suit<\/p>\n<p>         as the second respondent is the 7th plaintiff<\/p>\n<p>         and appellants are plaintiffs 1 to 6 and 8 and<\/p>\n<p>         9. When the sole defendant who is the first<\/p>\n<p>         respondent       dies naturally   the    legal<\/p>\n<p>         representatives should have been brought on<\/p>\n<p>         record in time. In the instant case, the first<\/p>\n<p>         petitioner who is the widow of the deceased<\/p>\n<p>         sole respondent has sworn that they were aware<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">R. S. A. No.1039 of 2004            -3-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>         of    the     death  of  the   first respondent  on<\/p>\n<p>         21\/09\/06. Their case is that they were not<\/p>\n<p>         aware of the need to implead the LRs of the<\/p>\n<p>         first respondent who is the sole defendant in<\/p>\n<p>         their suit. If at all they were not aware as<\/p>\n<p>         to the procedure to be adopted on the death of<\/p>\n<p>         the sole defendant in their case, they should<\/p>\n<p>         have contacted their counsel and done the<\/p>\n<p>         needful. They have slept over their rights for<\/p>\n<p>         more than two years and have filed these<\/p>\n<p>         applications      for   impleadment  setting  aside<\/p>\n<p>         abatement and to condone the delay of 590 days<\/p>\n<p>         in     filing    application   to   set aside   the<\/p>\n<p>         abatement as late as on 27\/09\/08. Other than<\/p>\n<p>         his     widow,    the  late   first respondent  was<\/p>\n<p>         having       three  sons  and   five daughters  and<\/p>\n<p>         nobody       has  taken any   interest to   do  the<\/p>\n<p>         needful in their case despite their knowledge<\/p>\n<p>         that the sole defendant in their case is dead.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">R. S. A. No.1039 of 2004          -4-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>         In the circumstances, I do not see any ground<\/p>\n<p>         to allow the impleadment of the LRs of the<\/p>\n<p>         deceased       first  respondent  as   additional<\/p>\n<p>         respondents      3   to  11  setting  aside   the<\/p>\n<p>         abatement condoning the delay of as much as<\/p>\n<p>         590 days in filing the application to set<\/p>\n<p>         aside the abatement.\n<\/p>\n<p>                4. In the result, I dismiss all these<\/p>\n<p>         applications.\n<\/p>\n<p>         R.S.A.1039\/04<\/p>\n<p>                I.A.2118\/08,     I.A.2119\/08   and   C.M.<\/p>\n<p>         Application      No.718\/08  are  dismissed  today<\/p>\n<p>         disallowing impleadment of LRs of the deceased<\/p>\n<p>         first       respondent setting   aside  abatement<\/p>\n<p>         condoning the inordinate delay of 590 days in<\/p>\n<p>         fling the application to set aside abatement.<\/p>\n<p>         The first respondent was the sole defendant in<\/p>\n<p>         the suit as the second respondent is the 7th<\/p>\n<p>         plaintiff who goes along with the appellants.<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">R. S. A. No.1039 of 2004         -5-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>         The result is that this appeal has abated.<\/p>\n<p>                In the result, this appeal is closed.<\/p>\n<p>                                         K.P.BALACHANDRAN,<br \/>\n                                                    JUDGE<br \/>\n         kns\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Kumaran vs Maman on 2 April, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM RSA.No. 1039 of 2004(F) 1. KUMARAN, S\/O. MATTAYI NARAYANAN, &#8230; Petitioner 2. JANAKI, D\/O. DO. IN DO. DO. 3. VALLI, D\/O. DO. IN DO. DO. 4. LAKSHMI, D\/O. DO. IN DO. DO. 5. DEVAKI, D\/O. DO. IN [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-135837","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Kumaran vs Maman on 2 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/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.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kumaran vs Maman on 2 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-04T22:31:56+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\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\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kumaran vs Maman on 2 April, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-04T22:31:56+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009\"},\"wordCount\":566,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009\",\"name\":\"Kumaran vs Maman on 2 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-04T22:31:56+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kumaran vs Maman on 2 April, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Kumaran vs Maman on 2 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","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.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kumaran vs Maman on 2 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-04T22:31:56+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kumaran vs Maman on 2 April, 2009","datePublished":"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-04T22:31:56+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009"},"wordCount":566,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009","name":"Kumaran vs Maman on 2 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-04-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-04T22:31:56+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kumaran-vs-maman-on-2-april-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kumaran vs Maman on 2 April, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/135837","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=135837"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/135837\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=135837"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=135837"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=135837"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}