Shri Justice Hrishikesh Roy, Hon’ble Chief Justice, High Court of Kerala
Shri E. Chandrasekharan, Hon’ble Minister for Revenue
Shri Justice Alexander Thomas, Hon’ble Judge, High Court of Kerala
Shri N. A Nellikkunnu, MLA, Kasaragode
Shri S Manohar Kini, District Judge, Chairman, Celebration Committee
Adv. A. C. Ashok Kumar, President, Kasaragod Bar Association
Members of the Bar,
Sahodaree Sahodaranmare
Ellavarkkum Ente Namaskaram
I am very happy to inaugurate the Valedictory function of the Diamond Jubilee Celebrations of the Subordinate Judge's Court , Kasaragod.
Let me begin by complimenting the efforts taken by the judicial Officers, the Bar Association and the people of Kasaragod in celebrating the Diamond Jubilee of this Court in a befitting manner. I am informed that the celebrations which began in November 2017 included unveiling of the statue of Mahatma Gandhi, Seminars, Lectures on the Preamble of the Constitution etc. The great interest with which the people of this district cooperated in these celebrations points to the immense trust enjoyed by this institution in society.
The story of how a Court was established as part of the British Judicial system in 1836 in Kanara district, how the Panchayat Courts functioned in Bekal Taluk which later became Kasaragod Taluk and how the Munsiff court at Bekal became the forerunner of this Subordinate Judge's Court is too well known to be retold in detail. It is also well known that many eminent Judges known today had contributed their legal acumen and persuasiveness for the efficient dispensation of justice in this Court in its history.
As a person who was fortunate to lead the Judiciary in India during 2013-14, as Chief Justice of Supreme Court of India, I feel a sense of nostalgia while attending functions like this. Today, I am reminded of my earlier days as an Advocate in lower courts and High Court, latter as Judge of High Courts of Madras, Punjab and Haryana, and finally in Supreme Court. It was on 6thJuly 1973, that I was enrolled as an advocate. When all my friends and colleagues started moving from the Bar Council building to celebrate their enrollment with a sumptuous lunch, I was ushered into my Senior's Chamber, where my Senior Advocate blessed me and entrusted a brief to appear before 'Master's Court' which is meant for verifying service of notice and pleadings.
The seriousness with which work was entrusted to me gave me my first lesson:Work is more important than lunch or simply, that it is Work that earns you a lunch. This lesson is still valid for any Lawyer, junior or senior.
Advocates need to maintain ethical control in their profession. You can fearlessly uphold the interest of your clients, but your conduct and expressions should be in tune with the rules framed by the Bar Council of India under Section 49[1] (a) of the Act. Equally important is his or her respectful attitude towards the Court. After all, in our democracy, the role of the Courts is not just the disposal of cases, but in protecting our fundamental rights and liberties. Besides, rendering justice is not a time bound task but a continuing mission. Our founding fathers envisaged the courts as the guarantors of justice, social order and public safety and the members of Bar and Bench must do everything possible to fulfill this responsibility.
The question of how prompt we are in delivering justice has been discussed in society many a time. Many people had even felt that the Indian Judiciary was yet to fully meet people's aspirations for speedy and affordable justice, considering the very large number of cases pending before various courts including High Courts and the Supreme Court.
We are aware of how the Supreme Court has been clearing an average of above 45,000 cases per year since 2013. And, all our High Courts put together have been disposing of an average of 17 lakh cases in recent years. Yet, we face the problem of backlog of cases.
It is in such a scenario that we ponder over different measures that can be adopted to reduce the backlog of cases in different courts. Appointing adequate number of Judges in Courts of various levels is easier said than done.
We have devised many provisions to settle cases through methods which are less difficult and time consuming. For instance, we have the Lok Adalat which is held several times a year in all court centers. As Governor, I have taken personal interest to issue an appeal to the people as well as Government and their organizations to make use of the Lok Adalat for speedy redressal of grievances. Yet, I feel that if Courts reach out to people, we will find more litigants coming forward to settle their disputes.
I am certain that all of you are aware of the avenues for Alternative Dispute Resolution, which can be invoked at any time, even if the matter is pending in the Court of Law. The disputes can be resolved more economically and speedily and it can reduce the work-load of the court through a flexible procedure. Cases under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and the Contract Act, 1872 etc. can be brought under the aegis of obligatory ADR. Similarly, cases involving family law (matrimonial disputes), insurance, compensation, labour disputes should also be brought under the ambit of ADR. By adopting Lok Adalat and ADR, I am assuring our legal fraternity, that all of you are eligible reasonable fees and more beneficial to our litigants.
Section 89 of the CPCread together with Rules 1–A, 1–B and 1–C of Order X would allow judges to refer disputes for settlement through ADR procedures in cases where elements of settlement are discernible. We should use the provisions of Section 89 as often as possible, since the referral to ADR decreases the case-load and arrears of the court and thus increases the time which can be devoted to other contentious matters.
We should also remember the matters about issuing Notice u/s 80 of CPC and response which is a conciliatory step towards settlement.
A statutory notice of two months before the proposed action under section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code 1908 is intended to alert the State and its all organs to negotiate a just settlement or at least have the courtesy to tell potential outsider why the claim is being resisted. The object is to curtail litigation and the area of dispute.
Wherever a notice is issued, the Government or departments or other statutory bodies should send a reply to such a notice and should properly deal with all material points and issues raised in the notice. As we all know, Government of India and State Governments are the largest litigants in India.
The State should have a policy of settlement of governmental disputes with citizens in sense of conciliation rather than in a fighting mood. Indeed, it should empower its law officers to take steps to compromise disputes rather than to continue them in court.
We should also be familiar with the Amendments in the Civil Procedure Code of 2002, enacted to reduce the delays, experienced by litigants. At this juncture there is no need to elaborate those amendments to members of Bar. Summons in addition to normal mode may now be delivered through Fax or email also.
As per amended Rule 1 Sub Rule (i), Order V, The defendant has to submit the written statement within 30 days of the service of summons. This may be extended upon an application to the court, up to a maximum of 90 days, with reasons for granting extension to be recorded in writing. As per amended Order VIII Rule 1, if the defendant fails to file the written statement within the given time the court may pass any order against the erring party or a judgment / decree. This provision would also definitely further the cause of speedy justice.
Under Order VI Rule 17, once the hearing is commenced both the plaintiff and defendant shall not be given leave by the court to amendthe suit unless the court decides that in spite of due diligence being exercised the party could not have raised the matter.
Oral arguments tend to go on endlessly and now under Rule 2(3A) of Order XVIII, written arguments can be submitted. This is a useful provision, because it offsets any possible injustice owing to the refusal of the Court to hear the arguments.
Coming to the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2005, the idea of plea bargaining simplifies the formal legal procedure and ensures speedier disposal. Plea bargaining applies to cases in which the maximum punishment is imprisonment for seven years; however, offences affecting the socio-economic condition of the country and offences committed against a woman or a child below the age of 14 are excluded.
Although the Evidence Act has been in force for many years, it has often been amended to acknowledge important developments. Amendments have been made to the Evidence Act to introduce the admissibility of both electronic records and paper-based documents.
As a solution to the case-congestion, people suggest temporary measures like reducing the number of court holidays and so on. However, we could try the judicious use of technology to increase the pace of procedures. The High Court of Delhi had launched its paperless court with one of the benches. It was reported that on the first day itself, 33 cases were heard.
The use of technology is becoming increasingly important in the delivery of justice. This calls for an elaborate Training mechanism for lawyers and judicial officers. As Judicial officers and lawyers, it is our duty to convince people about the process of law so that society gets a clear understanding of how the law could protect people.
I sincerely hope that the Subordinate Court at Kasaragod would take the lead in such awareness creation.
I once again greet all people who have assembled here and wish them all the best. I also complement the organizers for conducting this function in a befitting manner
Ellavarkkum Ente aashamsakal
Nanni
Jai Hind
