AdvocateKhoj
Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library
    

Report No. 14

11. The subordinate courts.-

Although the state of work in the High Court is under control and there are no appreciable arrears, the same cannot be said of the subordinate courts. The state of affairs in these courts is truly deplorable. Twenty-five district and sessions judges worked during the years 1953-54 and 1954-55 and twenty-two in 1955-56 including additional district and sessions Judges. The disposal of work of these officers is shown in the following Table:-

Table No. 4

Civil Suits

Small Cause Suits

Civil Appeals

Civil Miscellaneous Appeals

year

Total for disposal

Dispose of

Balance

Total for disposal

Disposed of

Balance

Total for disposal

Disposed of

Balance

Total for disposal

Disposed of

Balance

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

1953-54

7742

2256

5486

20

8

12

13589

5445

8144

2288

1212

976

1954-55

7350

2308

5042

22

14

8

13232

5571

7661

2171

1192

979

1955-56

7046

2333

4713

17

14

3

12947

6856

6091

2095

1143

952


Session Cases

Criminal Appeals

Criminal revisions

Case under Acts other than Balance

Year

Total for disposal

Disposed of

Balance

Total for disposal

Disposes of

Balance

Total for disposal

Disposed of

Balance

Total for

Disposed of

Balance

1953-54

315

255

60

340

284

56

125

90

35

1313

1312

1

1954-55

371

308

73

355

258

97

147

81

66

1742

1735

7

1955-56

512

370

142

559

402

157

240

141

99

1596

1598

8

12. It cannot be said that there is an inadequacy of judicial officers. Nevertheless, as is evident from the figures given in the above table, the disposals of these officers are low. From a perusal of the figures given in the following Table, it will appear that the number of old suits and appeals is extraordinarily large. Over twenty per cent. of the pending suits are over five years old and about forty per cent. of the civil appeals more than a year old and a substantial number have been pending for over two years. The need for the disposal of proceedings within a reasonable time does not seem to be present to the minds of the judicial officers concerned. A sense of urgency or a desire for expedition would seem to be totally absent.

Table No. 5

Nature of Proceeding

Year

Between

Between

Between

Between

Above

1 & 2 years

2 & 3 years

3 & 4 years

4 & 5 years

5 year

Regular Suits

1953-54

1078

954

669

417

1121

1954-55

854

782

646

488

1069

1955-56

863

579

522

470

1058

Regular Appeals

1953-54

2088

1200

521

170

164

1954-55

2035

1008

599

203

123

1955-56

1515

771

366

150

97

Note.-In 1955-56 some appeals were transferred to the subordinate judges; hence the sudden fall.

13. It was authoritatively stated by those in a position to know the true position that the delay in the disposal of proceedings in district courts was due to the fact that work is concentrated in the hands of a few lawyers-four or five-and that the judicial officers usually accommodate the advocates by granting adjournments freely. It was remarked: "Nobody wants to become unpopular. Even High Court Judges do not want to become unpopular. How can the district judges do that?"

Although some judges attributed the delays in courts to lawyers, it was conceded that if the presiding officers were strict in granting adjournments, much of the delay caused in the subordinate courts could be avoided. We were informed that the recent establishment and decentralisation of subordinate judges courts was intended among other things to combat the delays arising from the concentration of work in the hands of a few advocates and that this measure has had a fair measure of success. Further steps may be taken in this direction. It is also necessary that judges should learn to face some temporary unpopularity in the interests of expedition and long range efficiency.

Once the subordinate judicial officers realise that laxity in granting adjournments will draw unfavourable comment from the High Court and that firmness will be encouraged and supported, there is bound to he greater dispatch in the disposal of civil work. In view of the heavy arrears it will also be necessary to put some senior officers exclusively for the disposal of old suits, and relieve them of all current work.

14. The number of subordinate judges' courts was increased from one to three on 1st November, 1954, and to six on the 18th August, 1955. The following Table shows the disposal of work by these courts.

Table No. 6

Civil Suits

Small Cause Suits

Civil Appeals

Year

No. of officers

Total for disposal

Disposed of

Balance

Total for disposal

Disposed of

Balance

Total for disposal

Disposed of

Balance

Below one year

Above one year

Below one year

Above one year

Below one year

Above one year

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

1953-54

1

716

493

146

77

245

212

30

3

..

..

..

..

1954-55

3

932

595

134

203

184

162

21

1

..

..

..

..

1955-56

6

1410

813

336

265

192

170

21

1

1499

760

265

474

15. The Table set down below shows the number of suits pending over one year and the period for which they had been pending:

Table No. 7

Pending

Year

Between 1 & 2 years

Between 2 & 3 years

Between 3 & 4 years

Between 4 & 5 years

Above 5 years

1953-54

21

15

2

1

38

1954-55

48

42

22

18

73

1955-56

39

38

33

30

125







Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
Powered by Neosys Inc
Information provided on advocatekhoj.com is solely available at your request for informational purposes only and should not be interpreted as soliciting or advertisement