The cases pending adjudication in the trial Courts, High Courts and Supreme Courts are over 3 Cr, according to authentic Government sources. . But Chief Justice disputed the figure of mounting arrears and status of all cases that is pending administration of Justice. Justice S H Kapadia, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court addressing an all-India Seminar on Judicial reforms held at New Delhi recently.
The Chief Justice, like an experienced Economist explained that a Case filed today becomes a pending case of tomorrow. But, is that an arrear? CJ queried the audience in the immediate presence of Hon’ble’ President of India Smt Prathiba Patil, and other distinguished legal luminaries. He went on to report that 60% of the Cases pending in trial Courts were less than a year old. A realistic look at the arrears of Cases excluding cases which are a year old, the Chief Justice remarked, were around 1 Cr cases. He readily conceded that 1 cr cases were not small figures, and hence felt that a three track mechanism would help the Court to dispose off these Cases faster.
Track- I would comprise sticky cases involving complex questions of Law and would take time for adjudication; Track-II would include’ subversive’ cases where one of the litigants try to unduly prolong the case. Track-III cases are those which are delayed due to omissions and commissions of delay in serving summons and notices. He felt that judicial reforms should percolate to the Bar as well, if it has to be meaningful. He also invited senior advocates to contribute their wisdom towards expedition of complex cases.
The President, in her speech recounted the problems of the litigants in getting delayed justice. The justice delivery system has been afflicted by explosion of litigation. While she agreed with the Chief justice that we have to draw a line between arrears and pendency of Cases, even though the pending cases has been put at 3 cr which may include cases filed during the last one year.
She reminded the audience that while the litigant has one life, litigation transcended generations. She wanted Court procedures to be simplified. Frequent demands for adjournments, filing of multiple suits and similar tactics should be avoided to increase judicial productivity. Timely pronouncements of judgments and execution of decrees would go a long way to provide Justice without delay.
The major piling up of the Cases are the result of Government filing appeal against each and every judgment made by a lower Court without examining the merits of the Case. When a case is referred to the Law Ministry, the so called Under Secretary, finds it convenient to say that a grave lawful point has to be clarified, hence suggests filing an appeal. If due to any reason, he writes against appeal, there is a distinct possibility that the CAG or some other agency writing a note against the grave loss that the Government underwent because of non application of rational thinking. In many Cases, the Supreme Court had frowned upon the Government for filing appeals against judgments when there was not even 1% merit in the Case. The Government can indulge in such vexatious luxury as money is no constraint. So judicial reform should include Government on flimsy texts approaching the Court of Law for remedy when through arbitration, it can solve the case without indulging in wasteful expenditure This will curtail wastage of Court’s precious time. Reforms should begin at the Government’s cupboard.
No comments:
Post a Comment