lawyers play both roles. society makers and society breakers. But one should give attention towards the development of the nation.
I am not as experienced as the others here are. I am a student and would like to share this. I am presently interning at Chennai. I had been to the District Consumer Forum today. My senior told me about a few cases and hearing about one such case, I was puzzled.
The case was filed in 2005 or 2006 and order came in 2008. The Appellate body didn't pass an order even in 2013 saying that he will pass the order only when the opposite party appears and the party has not appeared since then. How long do that Judge intends to take this case??
Next is about a Appeal being filed. The office had filed an appeal like 2-3 weeks back, which is not even numbered till this date.
What can we all, being in this profession and not wanting our client to suffer more than what he/she has already suffered, do about these delays in giving justice to the people? I guess, lawyers must take a common oath that we will not create and let create adverse delay in any case.
Ethics is a entirely different ball game.
Everyone (including lawyers and justices) in conference and at public place, says that jusitice should be done immedietely, Jusitce delay is Justice denied. Once our ex-Chife Justice of India Sh.k.g.Balakrishan admitted and said that most of the lawyers delays the proceedings. But no one is at help. Take the example of cases u/s 138 N I Act, there are documentary proof of giving loan and in repayment post dated cheques are issued, and whenever they are dishonoured and cases are filed in courts, it takes at least 3 to 4 years, and in these years, accused does not tell anything that he has not taken loan, but only keeps on taking adjournments and getting foreited his bail bond, only to take fress bail, as offence is bailable offence, misutilising of bail process. As It is well knownh, bail is granted becaused no innocent person should be remain in jail, but it is misused to prologing the trial, and everyone is part of this procedure ie. accused,lawyer and judicial officer and staff.
There is very little fear in the mind of wrongdoer in our india, and one of the root cause is not working our judicial system properly, that all of us knows, that one of the most reasons of delays is not less staff of judicial officer, but delays tactics of the persons related to judicial system, protection to wrondoer from the persons related to judicial system, knowing very well that many a times, a person is culprit, but tried to get him acquitted on technical grounds, thus encourging the wrongdoer to do more wrongs, thus there is a little fear of law in the mind of wrongdoer in our india.
There is very little fear in the mind of wrongdoer in our india, and one of the root cause is not working our judicial system properly, that all of us knows, that one of the most reasons of delays is not less staff of judicial officer, but delays tactics of the persons related to judicial system, protection to wrondoer from the persons related to judicial system, knowing very well that many a times, a person is culprit, but tried to get him acquitted on technical grounds, thus encourging the wrongdoer to do more wrongs, because there is a little fear of law in the mind of wrongdoer in our india.
26. We had suggested to the parties that, if they both consent, we would decide the mater here itself and thereby two possible further rounds of litigation could be avoided. While Mr. Shanti Bhushan, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant was prepared for this, the learned Addl. Solicitor General declined to accept this suggestion. Hence, despite our being satisfied that the appellant had a case for review, we refrain from deciding what relief, if any, should be granted on such review, and leave it to the judgment of the High Court.
Supreme Court of India
Green View Tea And Industries vs Collector, Golaghat, Assam And ... on 17 February, 2004
The facts of the case are briefly that the government acquired the land of appellant in 1993 to urgently set up an oil refinery. The government it its initial proposal as per meeting held with CM fixed compensation for the Tea estate containing 691 bighas of land @ Rs.55000 per bigha. The appellant was conveyed the same. The appellant rejected the proposal and demanded a higher price. Consequently the government gave the land @Rs.7000/- per bigha which was protested by the appellant but as Land acquisition was as per law, he had no other way to surrender the land and take recourse to civil litigation. After a series of litigations at District court, High court level, this appeal against review petition of HC was filed in 2004 on the ground that material placed on record was not considered by HC. It means 11 years since the government acquired land. Having spent so much time, the SC instead of taking the case on its own to decide then and there itself proposed to the counsels for their opinion as to whether they are willing to the proposal of the apex court to decide the case at apex court itself. As can be seen from the above para, the counsel for the party was ready for it but the Government counsel did not accept. Hence the court was remitted back to HC. In other words the Govt. counsel wanted to delay the matter and further litigate. Is it fair for the court to ask for the opinion of the counsels without taking a decision on its own keeping the delay of ten years already taken place in view?
Land that costs Rs.55000/- per bigha was sold at Rs.7000/-. Even a school boy would know that this is gross injustice. After a decade the Supreme Court remits back the case to HC without taking a decision to decide on its own as Govt. Pleader objected to the proposal made by Supreme Court. This is also one of the reasons why so many cases are pending in Courts that indulge in red tape.
You need to be
logged in to post comment
You can also submit your article by sending to email@example.com
view more »
Our Network Sites
Join LAWyersclubindia.com and Share your Knowledge. Registered members get a chance to interact at Forum, Ask Query, Comment etc.