Sunday, February 28, 2021
Want create site? Find Free WordPress Themes and plugins.

Allahabad HC wags its finger at counsels seeking unnecessary adjournments

Want create site? Find Free WordPress Themes and plugins.

The Allahabad High Court expressed dissatisfaction on the acts of counsels seeking unnecessary adjournments ultimately affecting the justice-dispensation system.

A single-judge bench of Justice Rekha Dikshit passed this order while hearing a petition U/S 482 filed by Radha.

The petition has been filed with the prayer to issue direction to Judicial Magistrate-I, District Faizabad to decide the ase (Smt.Radha versus Hanuman & others) under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act pending before him since 2018.

It has been submitted that the aforesaid case is summary in nature, as such, it has to be decided within a stipulated period which has not been done by the Court concerned. It has also been submitted that ends of justice would be met if necessary direction is issued to Judicial Magistrate-I, District Faizabad to consider and decide the aforesaid case, in accordance with law, within stipulated time, to which, AGA has no objection.

The Apex Court in the judgment dated July 14, 2016 rendered in Special Leave Petition has relied upon the following:

The judgment of Shiv Cotex v. Tirgun Auto Plast Pvt. Ltd. (2011) 9 SCC 678 wherein it has been stated that “It is sad, but true, that the litigants seek. And the Courts grant adjournments at the drop of a hat. In the cases where the Judges are little proactive and refuse to accede to the requests of unnecessary adjournments, the litigants deploy all sorts of methods in protracting the litigation.”

The bench also relied on the judgment of Noor Mohammed v. Jethanand (2013) 5 SCC 202 wherein the Apex Court held that 

“Timely delivery of justice keeps the faith ingrained and establishes the sustained stability. Access to speedy justice is regarded as a human right which is deeply rooted in the foundational concept of democracy and such a right is not only the creation of law but also a natural right.”

The Court observed that in the present matter, the Advocates for Petitioner and defendant, have acted in a manner “to cause colossal insult to justice and to the concept of speedy disposal of civil litigation.”

We are constrained to say the virus of seeking adjournment has to be controlled. The saying of Gita “Awake! Arise! Oh Partha” is apt here to be stated for guidance of trial Courts.”

“The speedy justice is the fundamental right of every litigant but at the same time the long pendency of old cases also cannot be ignored and no one can be permitted to linger on the proceedings unnecessarily. It has also been experienced that the lawyers also abstain from work on various counts. A Counsel appearing for a litigant has to have institutional responsibility and it is expected that unnecessary adjournments should not be sought”

-the order reads.

Also Read: SC adjourns Ashwini Kumar plea seeking removal of anomalies in adoption, guardianship

The Court has directed the Judicial Magistrate, Faizabad to consider and decide the matter within three months and deal the same in accordance with law.

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.

News Update

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.