Chief Justice of India, Justice S H Kapadia, hit the nail right on the head when he bemoaned that many cases could have been solved through negotiation, arbitration and mediation, instead of being filed under one section or the other, and goes up to Supreme Court for no reason. He regretted that unnecessary prolonged delay in delivering justice because of mountain of Cases that were at the hearing stage, or admitted and where stay was given, took a long time for adjudication. . An ordinary citizen of India is vexed at the delay, making justice denied as far as he was concerned. If lucky, may be, his son may get justice, after long winding years.
Supreme Court will crumble under the weight of pending cases, one Chief Justice remarked. Justice Chandrachud, who was CJ for seven long years, expressed distrust at the legal delivery system in India, even though he held the top-most post of the Judiciary for a record term.
Everybody is seriously concerned about the judicial system. Parliament is concerned, lawyers are concerned, and litigants are frustrated, judicial officers are anxious to settle the cases. The suffering litigants feel dejected because of the delay in the adjudicatory process and the high cost involved in it as well as the inflexibility of the process.
The Motor Vehicle cases, third party settlement cases, insurance cases, where the mighty organizations are on the one-side prolong the case as much as possible, causing untold distress. After a long time after a claim is filed, finding some loophole and absurd reason, they reject the claim. There are many hit and run cases, where proper compensation is not got, because of grave miscarriage of justice. Insurance Companies act like an arbitrary forum. They have haste in thursting a Policy, and never about the settlement of a Claim. The cases that come under the Compensation for land acquired by the Government, goes upto the Supreme Court. Why can’t there be an arbitrator channel, where the case is decided once and for all. From what could have been cleared at the District Consumer Forum, the case is appealed and appealed until it reaches the Supreme Court after inordinate delay, and the judgment given by the lowest forum is upheld by the Supreme Court. Why should Court accept appeals which neither have any unique point of law which requires judicial interpretation at a higher level, or when some gross miscarriage of justice has happened. Like Jessica Lal case, Ruchika case, and some other well known cases like Olga tellis, Bhagalpur blinding, Airhostess case (discrimination as they were retired at 40, while men worked up to 60). The Bhopal Gas tragedy case took quarter century for the Hon’ble Court to give judgment, that too the Court of original jurisdiction- Chief Judicial Magistrate’s court. Now appeal against this will lie in the High Court, and further to the Supreme Court, and the accused are having money bags. How many more years the case will take, the turn it will take, only God knows. Speedy justice should be the maxim rather than the rule.
Chief Justice of India was right in saying that, “we must understand the value of time. This is one of the areas we need to focus on how to promote that culture.” He cited the example of a case which was for recovering Rs 5, the litigant spent 15 years in Courts.
It is not that we don’t have people who are experts in the art of negotiation. There are excellent mediators who know the law and can adjudicate disputes methodologically, and legally. Arbitration is one fora where the disputed parties questioning an interpretation of a Contract, or failure to supply goods within the stipulated time, or the supplied goods were defective so asked for compensation etc.
The Government is the greatest litigant. For anything and everything, the bureaucrat when confronted with a problem writes that the matter may be referred for judicial scrutiny. I have heard many Government servants, including top bureaucrats telling me that if he adjudicated the case honestly in one way or the other, some body will blow up the Case and CBI will come into the picture, and his embarrassment will start. To be clear and clever, if he can pass on the buck to somebody, he is free from trouble. There is Income-Tax cases which does not have an iota of argument in referring to Courts, Sales/Commercial Tax cases, Customs cases, Central Excise cases, Commercial disputes, tenancy problems, insurance cases, administrative, etc. These can be settled locally, and the consensus implemented. In foreign countries, people preferred Mediation, and the cases were solved in no time. In Tirupur in Tamilnadu, Tirupur Exporters Association took up arbitration, cases amongst members, cases against workers, even foreign buyers complained to the body to settle. This experiment has been found to be very successful. Why can’t other apex Chambers of Commerce and/or other bodies sort out the issue amicably through their apex organization, instead of dragging it and stretching it upto Supreme Court.
If cases are appealed against for silly and unsustainable reasons, higher Court of Appeal should reject appeals at the introduction stage itself. Granting of stay, a weapon used by the rich litigants, must not become universal. It must be sparingly given on merit.
The Lok Adalt movement must be revived. It can settle a number of cases where intricate law points are not involved. The disputes can be settled amicably. The Courts, should take the first step, to prevent filing of cases, revision petitions, appeals, etc.
Supreme Court will crumble under the weight of pending cases, one Chief Justice remarked. Justice Chandrachud, who was CJ for seven long years, expressed distrust at the legal delivery system in India, even though he held the top-most post of the Judiciary for a record term.
Everybody is seriously concerned about the judicial system. Parliament is concerned, lawyers are concerned, and litigants are frustrated, judicial officers are anxious to settle the cases. The suffering litigants feel dejected because of the delay in the adjudicatory process and the high cost involved in it as well as the inflexibility of the process.
The Motor Vehicle cases, third party settlement cases, insurance cases, where the mighty organizations are on the one-side prolong the case as much as possible, causing untold distress. After a long time after a claim is filed, finding some loophole and absurd reason, they reject the claim. There are many hit and run cases, where proper compensation is not got, because of grave miscarriage of justice. Insurance Companies act like an arbitrary forum. They have haste in thursting a Policy, and never about the settlement of a Claim. The cases that come under the Compensation for land acquired by the Government, goes upto the Supreme Court. Why can’t there be an arbitrator channel, where the case is decided once and for all. From what could have been cleared at the District Consumer Forum, the case is appealed and appealed until it reaches the Supreme Court after inordinate delay, and the judgment given by the lowest forum is upheld by the Supreme Court. Why should Court accept appeals which neither have any unique point of law which requires judicial interpretation at a higher level, or when some gross miscarriage of justice has happened. Like Jessica Lal case, Ruchika case, and some other well known cases like Olga tellis, Bhagalpur blinding, Airhostess case (discrimination as they were retired at 40, while men worked up to 60). The Bhopal Gas tragedy case took quarter century for the Hon’ble Court to give judgment, that too the Court of original jurisdiction- Chief Judicial Magistrate’s court. Now appeal against this will lie in the High Court, and further to the Supreme Court, and the accused are having money bags. How many more years the case will take, the turn it will take, only God knows. Speedy justice should be the maxim rather than the rule.
Chief Justice of India was right in saying that, “we must understand the value of time. This is one of the areas we need to focus on how to promote that culture.” He cited the example of a case which was for recovering Rs 5, the litigant spent 15 years in Courts.
It is not that we don’t have people who are experts in the art of negotiation. There are excellent mediators who know the law and can adjudicate disputes methodologically, and legally. Arbitration is one fora where the disputed parties questioning an interpretation of a Contract, or failure to supply goods within the stipulated time, or the supplied goods were defective so asked for compensation etc.
The Government is the greatest litigant. For anything and everything, the bureaucrat when confronted with a problem writes that the matter may be referred for judicial scrutiny. I have heard many Government servants, including top bureaucrats telling me that if he adjudicated the case honestly in one way or the other, some body will blow up the Case and CBI will come into the picture, and his embarrassment will start. To be clear and clever, if he can pass on the buck to somebody, he is free from trouble. There is Income-Tax cases which does not have an iota of argument in referring to Courts, Sales/Commercial Tax cases, Customs cases, Central Excise cases, Commercial disputes, tenancy problems, insurance cases, administrative, etc. These can be settled locally, and the consensus implemented. In foreign countries, people preferred Mediation, and the cases were solved in no time. In Tirupur in Tamilnadu, Tirupur Exporters Association took up arbitration, cases amongst members, cases against workers, even foreign buyers complained to the body to settle. This experiment has been found to be very successful. Why can’t other apex Chambers of Commerce and/or other bodies sort out the issue amicably through their apex organization, instead of dragging it and stretching it upto Supreme Court.
If cases are appealed against for silly and unsustainable reasons, higher Court of Appeal should reject appeals at the introduction stage itself. Granting of stay, a weapon used by the rich litigants, must not become universal. It must be sparingly given on merit.
The Lok Adalt movement must be revived. It can settle a number of cases where intricate law points are not involved. The disputes can be settled amicably. The Courts, should take the first step, to prevent filing of cases, revision petitions, appeals, etc.
No comments:
Post a Comment