Late interlocutory application
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 29 October 2018
This query is : Resolved
I am defendant.
Plaintiffs have filed interlocutory application to prolong the trial after giving witness statement and after cross examination and when the issues pertaining to plaintiffs were easily decisive / decidable and almost all issues obviously went against plaintiffs.
Cause of action for IA application was much before the issues were framed and averments in application are contrary to witness statement filed by plaintiffs.
Case is prolonging ( almost three years since application filed). Plaintiffs case is not tenable but he has managed to prolong it. Plaintiffs evidence is over, hearing on IA application of plaintiffs is going on.
I do not know what is going on.
My query is can defendant ask for disclosing of remarks of judges so far on the issues.
Xperts my sincere thanks to you, please reply anything except " why don't you ask your lawyer" neither it is academic query.
Regards
Isaac Gabriel
(Expert) 29 October 2018
You have hide you identity , but advice the experts not to evade. It is rather unconventional and uncalled for.Respect this forum and experts.
KISHAN DUTT KALASKAR
(Expert) 29 October 2018
Dear Sir,
The judges cannot be asked for disclosing their remarks on issues before judgment is finally pronounced. However to expedite the matter you may go through the following circular and ask the trial court to finish it off ASAP or you may approach HC for time bound disposal. Now Litigant must be considered as “legal process consumer” and must be given a right to approach the Consumer Court for delayed judgments on the basis of following circulars and exorbitant Court Fee being charged in civil cases.
=====================================================================
Karnataka Case Flow Management Rules
SIMILAR RULES ARE FRAMED BY ALL THE HIGH COURTS
the Karnataka High Court has launched the Case Flow Management system.
The Karnataka (Case Flow Management in Subordinate Courts) Rules 2005, as it is called, was gazetted by the State Government almost two years ago. Subsequently, the High Court framed the rules applicable to all suits and civil proceedings before the subordinate civil courts and tribunals.
It divides cases into four tracks.
Disposal in 9 months:
In Track 1 the High court has included suits on maintenance, child custody, appointment of guardians and wards, visiting rights, letters of administration, succession certificate, recovery of rent and permanent injunction. All cases under this category will have to be disposed of within nine months.
Disposal in 12 months:
In Track 2, cases on execution, divorce and ejectment will have to be disposed of within 12 months.
Disposal in 24 months:
Cases to be disposed in 24 months relate to partition, declaration, specific performance, possession, mandatory injunction, appeals, damages, easements, trade marks, copy rights, patents and intellectual property rights.
Disposal in 24 months:
Cases that are not in any of the three categories are included in the fourth category and they too have to be disposed of in 24 months. The presiding officer, however, has the right to dispose of the case earlier.
The rules prescribe a mandatory time limit for various court procedures such as issue of summons/notices. Proceedings shall indicate a maximum of 30 days for filing statement or objection from the date of service.
The procedures for IAs and interim orders and reference to mediation, conciliation or Lok Adalat, appointment of commissioners for recording of evidence, proceedings for perjury, adjournment and even first appeals have also been spelt out.
http://www.judicialreforms.in/forums/showthread.php?tid=63
Please mark “LIKE” if satisfied by my answer.
Guest
(Expert) 30 October 2018
Better rely on your own lawyer.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 30 October 2018
Thanks x pets, anonymity was not to reveal identity to other stake holders. Regards
Guest
(Expert) 30 October 2018
Enjoy your anonymity. But take help of your own lawyer. Anonymous querists do not deserve any help.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 30 October 2018
Thanks Shri Dutt Sir,
People resort to this platform to get some clue, solace and course of legal action.
Competent and lawyers with integrity in small towns are difficult to get, in such circumstances litigant has no choice but to garner information from here or there and then apply his mind. Once a wrong lawyer is hired....one is in deep trouble.
The chaos in smaller courts is known to all. Nexus among lawyers is prevalent
( other lawyers wouldn't take up the case of aggrieved litigant even grievance is justified)
My case is a case study on the pathetic state of judiciary at Taluka level courts and nexus of lawyers in some small but prosperous towns.
I will share details in various fora once the suit ends.( instituted in 2005 , trial began in 2013, ws by plaintiffs in 2014, IA by plaintiffs in 2015 which came for hearing in 2018 jan, still going on. I am defendant and yet no defendant evidence given)
My request to other xperts and penalists to
be little humble to querists, regarding anonymity a rose by any name would smell sweet, then why not remove the option from the site.
Inadvertently curt replies rub salt to the wounds of querist.
Yet my sincere thanks to all.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 30 October 2018
Thanks Shri Dutt Sir,
People resort to this platform to get some clue, solace and course of legal action.
Competent and lawyers with integrity in small towns are difficult to get, in such circumstances litigant has no choice but to garner information from here or there and then apply his mind. Once a wrong lawyer is hired....one is in deep trouble.
The chaos in smaller courts is known to all. Nexus among lawyers is prevalent
( other lawyers wouldn't take up the case of aggrieved litigant even grievance is justified)
My case is a case study on the pathetic state of judiciary at Taluka level courts and nexus of lawyers in some small but prosperous towns.
I will share details in various fora once the suit ends.( instituted in 2005 , trial began in 2013, ws by plaintiffs in 2014, IA by plaintiffs in 2015 which came for hearing in 2018 jan, still going on. I am defendant and yet no defendant evidence given)
My request to other xperts and penalists to
be little humble to querists, regarding anonymity a rose by any name would smell sweet, then why not remove the option from the site.
Inadvertently curt replies rub salt to the wounds of querist.
Yet my sincere thanks to all.
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 31 October 2018
Seek advise of your lawyer, however, as observed and pointed out "anonymous" author is discouraged for obligation by experts as per rule of this platform.
