Adjournments -

[csarengarajan]

 

In Our country, court process is a long process. For getting justice, one has to undergo various procedure  as per courts rules and regulations  across india. Adjournment of the proceeding will further delay the process of speedy trail. The court has got power to adjourn the case on case to case basis depending upon the circumstances . Order XVII of Civil Procedure code deals with Adjournments.

 

Adjournments:   Generally the Court can grant adjournments for unavoidable reasons. Both plaintiff and defendants  can  request for adjournments.  . Before granting adjournments,  the Court shall ascertain the following things.

 

1)  Past conduct of a person seeking adjournment

 

2)  Court must be satisfied that there is sufficient cause to grant adjournment

 

3) Whether the party seeking adjournment is prevented or disabled  from producing his evidence on that particular day

 

4) Facts and Circumstances of each case

 

The following are some of the sufficient causes to grant adjournments. The parties generally asking these kind of excuses for adjournment of case.

 

1)  sickness of a party to the suit, or his witness or his counsel

 

2)  Non service of summons

 

3) Inability of a party to engage another advocate

 

4)  Withdrawal of appearance by a cousel

 

5)  Reasonable time for preparation of a case

 

The following are some of examples  for insufficient grounds for granting adjournments:

 

a)  Engagement of a counsel in another court

 

b)  Delaying the coduct of the party

 

c)  When a case is long pending or  very old

 

d)  abuse of process of court

 

e)  Non examination of  witness present in the court

 

f) Interlocutory proceedings : An interlocutory application means an application to the Court in any suit, appeal or proceeding already instituted in such Court other than an application for execution of a decree or order or for review of judgment or for leave to appeal. "ORDER XXXVIIA
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATIONS
 

g) Undertaking by the party to proceed with the matter

 

h)  Inconvenience to the opposite party or his witness

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source: NDTV.Com

 

Reasons for delay - H M Seervai foremost authority in Constitutional Law - 

)

The judicial process in India even at the level of the Supreme Court was severely criticised by H M Seervai (1906-1996) who held the office of Advocate General of Maharashtra from 1957 to 1974. He is considered as one of the foremost authorities in the field of Constitutional Law. In 1981 he wrote about the following issues / problems / bottlenecks / hurdles coming in the way of smooth functioning of the judicial process in India even at the highest level of Supreme Court. :

H M Seervai
1. The greatest cause of delay is adjournments obtained by fashionable Counsel for their personal convenience because they are busy in other Courts and Judges grant adjournments contrary to the express provision of the amended 0.17, Rule 1 of SUPREME COURT RULES which says that the fact that a Counsel is in another Court is not a ground for adjournment and the fact that a Counsel is ill is not a ground for adjournment if there was time to return the brief and brief another Counsel. Former Chief Justice Chagla completely endorsed this view of Seervai.

2. Seervai said there are two types of adjournments: open and concealed. As regards open adjournments, he stated that once a date has been fixed to suit the convenience of all parties, the Supreme Court should set an example by refusing all adjournments not permitted by 0.17, Rule 1. To quote Seervai's brilliant words in this context : 'The litigant and the administration of justice come first, the Judges come second and Counsel come third. Adjournments for mutual accommodation of Counsel who accept briefs in various courts are bringing the administration of justice into contempt, to the delight of those who discredit the judiciary and destroy its independence.' As regards concealed adjournments, Seervai had this to say: On the day reserved for admission of Special Leave Petitions, the Supreme Court sits in several Divisional Benches of two Judges. Counsel accept briefs in a number of Courts: A, C, E, G—etc. If a Counsel is not present in Court A, because he is in Court C or D, Judges in Court A say 'Pass over'. This is an euphemism for adjourning the matter pro tanto for Counsel's convenience and such an adjournment should be refused. Counsel must make up their minds in which Court they will accept briefs. The dismissal of a Special Leave Petition because Counsel is absent may cause hardship, but will promote the interest of justice by removing the unfortunate impression that only one of six or eight Counsel must be briefed at fancy fees if the petition has any chance of success. In his great essay on the Judicature, Francis Bacon struck a heavy blow on this evil with insight when he said: 'But it is more strange, that Judges should have noted favourites; which cannot but cause multiplication of fees at the suggestion of bye ways', a suggestion which has increased when the favourite entertains the Judge.

3. The Supreme Court has created an additional burden by allowing a party to file a Special Leave Petition from the judgement of a single Judge, thus obliterating the distinction between Special Leave and Leave as a matter of right. No doubt this has been done to save expense and time, but the Supreme Court gets so cluttered up that matters remain undecided for years . The Supreme Court is a Court of Law and though it has power to revie4w both fact and law, it is an exceptional power and the exception ought not to be the rule as it seems to have become today. To allow the individual Judge's feeling of injustice to admit petitions is, to apply the words of Justice Gajendragadkar: inevitably to introduce in such decisions a disconcerting unpredictability usually associated with gambling, and that is a reproach which the judicial process must constantly and scrupulously try to avoid.

5. Many Judges today are over-anxious to be in the vanguard of modern thought by references  to psychology, sociology, anthropology political theor

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Conclusion:  The Court enjoys the wide discretion in matters of adjournments.   Further the Court is empowered to proceed  to dispose of the suit, where the parties fail to appear on the day of adjournment.  It is also to be noted  that the court must exercise its discretion reasonable.  Such discretion must exercise  to clear the arrears of cases and to provide  speedy disposal.