{"id":10487,"date":"2025-10-21T10:13:23","date_gmt":"2025-10-21T10:13:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?p=10487"},"modified":"2025-10-21T10:21:11","modified_gmt":"2025-10-21T10:21:11","slug":"unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/","title":{"rendered":"Unconditional Stay and Jurisdictional Fairness: A Reaffirmation of Judicial Discretion under Order XLI Rule 5 CPC"},"content":{"rendered":"<h2 id=\"case-overview\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Case_Overview\"><\/span>Case Overview<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p><strong>Facts:<\/strong> Lifestyle Equities C.V., headquartered in Amsterdam, along with its Indian licensee, owned the registered trademark \u201cBeverly Hills Polo Club (BHPC)\u201d used for apparel, shoes, accessories, furniture, and personal care products. Amazon Technologies Inc. was accused of facilitating sales of counterfeit goods bearing a mark identical or deceptively similar to the BHPC logo.<\/p><div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_82_2 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-grey ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\" style=\"cursor:inherit\">Table of Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"ez-toc-pull-right ez-toc-btn ez-toc-btn-xs ez-toc-btn-default ez-toc-toggle\" aria-label=\"Toggle Table of Content\"><span class=\"ez-toc-js-icon-con\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#Case_Overview\" >Case Overview<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#The_Suit\" >The Suit<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#The_Appeal\" >The Appeal<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#Procedural_Details\" >Procedural Details<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#Issues_Raised_in_the_SLP\" >Issues Raised in the SLP<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#The_Dispute\" >The Dispute<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-7\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#Reasoning_of_the_Court\" >Reasoning of the Court<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-8\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#Purpose_of_Order_XLI_Rules_1_5_CPC\" >Purpose of Order XLI Rules 1 &amp; 5 CPC<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-9\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#Whether_DepositSecurity_is_Mandatory\" >Whether Deposit\/Security is Mandatory<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-10\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#Scope_of_Judicial_Discretion\" >Scope of Judicial Discretion<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-11\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#Service_of_Summons\" >Service of Summons<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-12\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#On_Damages_and_Maintainability\" >On Damages and Maintainability<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-13\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#License_and_Liability_Findings\" >License and Liability Findings<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-14\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#Analogy_with_Arbitration_Act\" >Analogy with Arbitration Act<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-15\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#Protection_of_Due_Process\" >Protection of Due Process<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-16\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#Judgment_and_Decision\" >Judgment and Decision<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-17\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#Final_Holding\" >Final Holding<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-18\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#Disclaimer\" >Disclaimer<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-19\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/unconditional-stay-and-jurisdictional-fairness-a-reaffirmation-of-judicial-discretion-under-order-xli-rule-5-cpc\/#Written_By\" >Written By<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n\n<h2 id=\"the-suit\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"The_Suit\"><\/span>The Suit<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>In 2020, Lifestyle filed a commercial suit <strong>(CS(COMM) 443\/2020)<\/strong> in the Delhi High Court, alleging trademark infringement and passing off. The company sought:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Permanent injunction<\/li>\n<li>Delivery-up of infringing goods<\/li>\n<li>Damages of Rs. 2.00 crore<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The suit named three defendants \u2014 Amazon Technologies Inc. (Defendant 1), Cloudtail Pvt. Ltd. (Defendant 2), and Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd. (Defendant 3).<\/p>\n<p>Defendant No. 1 did not appear and was proceeded <i>ex parte<\/i>. An interim order dated <strong>12 October 2020<\/strong> restrained all defendants from using the BHPC mark. The suit was decreed <i>ex parte<\/i> against Amazon Technologies Inc. on <strong>25 February 2025<\/strong>, granting damages of Rs. 336 crores, costs of Rs. 3.23 crores, and a permanent injunction based on an alleged computation of damages worth USD 38.78 million.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"the-appeal\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"The_Appeal\"><\/span>The Appeal<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>Amazon appealed before the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court <strong>(RFA(O.S.)(COMM) 11\/2025)<\/strong>, which stayed execution of the money decree without requiring deposit of the decretal amount, subject to an undertaking to comply if the appeal were dismissed. Lifestyle Equities then filed a <strong>Special Leave Petition (SLP)<\/strong> before the Supreme Court challenging this \u201cunconditional stay.\u201d<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"procedural-details\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Procedural_Details\"><\/span>Procedural Details<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The matter reached the Supreme Court through <strong>SLP (C) No. 19767 of 2025<\/strong> under <strong>Article 136<\/strong> of the Constitution.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"slp-issues\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Issues_Raised_in_the_SLP\"><\/span>Issues Raised in the SLP<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>Whether the Delhi High Court erred in not insisting upon deposit\/security under Order XLI Rule 1(3), Rule 5(3), and Rule 5(5) CPC while granting stay of a money decree.<\/li>\n<li>Whether an unconditional stay was legally sustainable.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 id=\"the-dispute\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"The_Dispute\"><\/span>The Dispute<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The central issue was reconciling two competing legal principles:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>The CPC rule that an appeal does not automatically stay execution, and stay requires adequate cause and security.<\/li>\n<li>The High Court\u2019s discretionary power to grant conditional or unconditional stay in exceptional cases.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Lifestyle argued that the stay was unlawful due to lack of mandatory deposit. Amazon countered that valid service of summons was never effected and the decree suffered from procedural irregularities, inflating damages far beyond the original Rs. 2 crore claim without amendment or notice.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"reasoning-of-the-court\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Reasoning_of_the_Court\"><\/span>Reasoning of the Court<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<h3 id=\"purpose-of-order-xli\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Purpose_of_Order_XLI_Rules_1_5_CPC\"><\/span>Purpose of Order XLI Rules 1 &amp; 5 CPC<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The Court traced the <strong>1976 amendments<\/strong> introducing sub-rule (3) in Rule 1 and sub-rule (5) in Rule 5, requiring deposit\/security for stay. The purpose was to prevent abuse of the appellate process while maintaining equitable discretion in exceptional cases.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"deposit-security-mandatory\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Whether_DepositSecurity_is_Mandatory\"><\/span>Whether Deposit\/Security is Mandatory<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The Court held that the requirement is <strong>directory, not mandatory<\/strong>. Non-deposit bars stay but does not invalidate the appeal. Unconditional stay may be granted in exceptional cases where enforcement would be unjust or impossible.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"judicial-discretion\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Scope_of_Judicial_Discretion\"><\/span>Scope of Judicial Discretion<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>An unconditional stay can be justified only if the decree is:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Patently illegal or perverse<\/li>\n<li>Facially untenable<\/li>\n<li>Affected by fraud or manifest injustice<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3 id=\"service-of-summons\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Service_of_Summons\"><\/span>Service of Summons<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The Supreme Court agreed that <strong>Amazon Technologies was never validly served<\/strong>. There was no affidavit of service or proof of electronic notice as directed earlier. Proceeding <i>ex parte<\/i> without proper service constituted a foundational illegality, vitiating jurisdiction.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"damages-and-maintainability\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"On_Damages_and_Maintainability\"><\/span>On Damages and Maintainability<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The Court found that the decree inflated damages from Rs. 2 crore to Rs. 336 crore without amendment or notice, violating <strong>Order VII Rules 2 and 7 CPC<\/strong>. The absence of pleadings or evidence supporting enhancement rendered the decree perverse.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"license-liability\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"License_and_Liability_Findings\"><\/span>License and Liability Findings<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The High Court rightly noted that Amazon Technologies merely licensed its \u201cSYMBOL\u201d brand and had no role in the alleged infringement. The inference that all Amazon entities formed one \u201ccohesive commercial entity\u201d lacked any evidence.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"arbitration-analogy\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Analogy_with_Arbitration_Act\"><\/span>Analogy with Arbitration Act<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The Court rejected reliance on Section 36(3) of the Arbitration Act, clarifying that the power to grant unconditional stay under Order XLI Rule 5 CPC exists independently but should be exercised rarely in extreme situations.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"due-process\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Protection_of_Due_Process\"><\/span>Protection of Due Process<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The Court reaffirmed that <strong>valid service of summons is the foundation of jurisdiction<\/strong>. Absence of service allows a defendant to avoid liability regardless of procedural lapses by counsel or co-defendants.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"judgment-and-decision\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Judgment_and_Decision\"><\/span>Judgment and Decision<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The Supreme Court upheld the Delhi High Court\u2019s order dated <strong>1 July 2025<\/strong>, dismissing the SLP. It found no reason to interfere, holding that the Division Bench correctly identified procedural irregularities and lack of jurisdiction. The stay of execution was thus justified even without deposit.<\/p>\n<p>The Court emphasized that unconditional stay is an exception, permissible only to prevent grave injustice. In this case, irregularities included:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Absence of valid summons<\/li>\n<li>Unexplained escalation of damages<\/li>\n<li>Lack of findings of infringement against Amazon<\/li>\n<li>Misreading of license agreement<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 id=\"final-holding\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Final_Holding\"><\/span>Final Holding<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<table>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<th>Case Title<\/th>\n<td>Lifestyle Equities C.V. &amp; Another Vs. Amazon Technologies Inc.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th>Order Date<\/th>\n<td>7th October 2025<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th>Case Number<\/th>\n<td>Civil Appeal No. 19767 of 2025<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th>Neutral Citation<\/th>\n<td>2025 INSC 1190<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th>Court<\/th>\n<td>Supreme Court of India<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th>Hon\u2019ble Judges<\/th>\n<td>J.B. Pardiwala J. and K.V. Viswanathan J.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>The Court reiterated that <strong>unconditional stay of a money decree<\/strong> is permissible only in <strong>exceptional circumstances<\/strong>, upholding fairness and due process over procedural rigidity.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"disclaimer\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Disclaimer\"><\/span>Disclaimer<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n<p>The information provided serves the public interest by offering insights into judicial reasoning. Readers are advised to exercise discretion while interpreting this summary. The content may reflect subjective interpretation.<\/p>\n<h3 id=\"author\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Written_By\"><\/span>Written By<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p><strong>Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman<\/strong>, IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney], High Court of Delhi<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Case Overview Facts: Lifestyle Equities C.V., headquartered in Amsterdam, along with its Indian licensee, owned the registered trademark \u201cBeverly Hills Polo Club (BHPC)\u201d used for apparel, shoes, accessories, furniture, and personal care products. Amazon Technologies Inc. was accused of facilitating sales of counterfeit goods bearing a mark identical or deceptively similar to the BHPC logo.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":56,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"two_page_speed":[],"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"_joinchat":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[336],"class_list":{"0":"post-10487","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-intellectual-property","7":"tag-delhi-high-court"},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10487","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/56"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10487"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10487\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10487"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10487"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10487"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}