9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 589X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed granting time for cross examination as a last chance and that too at one point of time even a cost was also imposed and even thereafter also when lastly the High Court passed an order with extending the time it was specifically mentioned that no further time shall be extended and/or granted still the petitioner defendant never availed of the liberty and the grace shown. In fact it can be said that the petitioner defendant misused the liberty and the grace shown by the court. There are no justification for adjourning the matter beyond three times which is the maximum number statutorily provided - Appeal is dismissed for non prosecution in terms of Rule 20 of CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982. - HON BLE MR. SANJIV SRIVASTAVA, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Request for Adjournment, for the Appellant Shri Santosh Kumar, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER SANJIV SRIVASTAVA : In this matter Counsel has requested for adjournment, which cannot be accepted in virtual hearing. While making the request for virtual hearing, Counsel also undertakes that he will not seek adjournment in this matter. It is also observed that the matter has been listed on the request of the Counsel for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s sought mechanically and allowed by the Courts/Tribunal s Hon ble Supreme Court has observed as follows: 1. Present is the classic example of misuse of the adjournments granted by the court. Present SLPs have been preferred challenging the impugned order dated 17.02.2021 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Indore in M.P. No.107 of 2021 and M.P. No.108 of 2021 by which the High Court has dismissed the said misc. petition preferred by the petitioner original defendant, confirming the order passed by the learned Trial Court dated 21.12.2020 closing the right to cross-examine the plaintiff s witness. 4. As observed hereinabove, present is a classic example of misuse of adjournments granted by the court. It is to be noted that the respondents herein original plaintiffs filed the suit for eviction, arrears of rent and mesne profit as far as back in the year 2013. That thereafter despite the repeated adjournments sought and granted by the court and even twice the adjournments were granted as a last opportunity and even the cost was imposed, the defendant failed to cross examine the plaintiff s witness. Although the adequate liberty was given to the defendant to cross exa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entire body of justice delivery system. 17. A party to the suit is not at liberty to proceed with the trial at its leisure and pleasure and has no right to determine when the evidence would be let in by it or the matter should be heard. The parties to a suit whether the plaintiff or the defendant must cooperate with the court in ensuring the effective work on the date of hearing for which the matter has been fixed. If they don't, they do so at their own peril. 5.2 Commenting on the delay in the justice delivery system, although in respect of the criminal trial, Krishna Iyer, J. in the case of Babu Singh v. State of U.P. (1978) 1 SCC 579 has observed in paragraph 4 as under: 4. Our justice system, even in grave cases, suffers from slow motion syndrome which is lethal to fair trial , whatever the ultimate decision. Speedy justice is a component of social justice since the community, as a whole, is concerned in the criminal being condignly and finally punished within a reasonable time and the innocent being absolved from the inordinate ordeal of criminal proceedings. 5.3 In the case of Noor Mohammed v. Jethanand and Anr. (2013) 5 SCC 202, using very harsh words and condemning the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore the High Court, if we allow ourselves to say so, epitomises the corrosive effect that adjournments can have on a litigation and how a lis can get entangled in the tentacles of an octopus. The philosophy of justice, the role of a lawyer and the court, the obligation of a litigant and all legislative commands, the nobility of the Bench and the Bar, the ability and efficiency of all concerned and ultimately the divinity of law are likely to make way for apathy and indifference when delay of the present nature takes place, for procrastination on the part of anyone destroys the values of life and creates a catastrophic turbulence in the sanctity of law. The virtues of adjudication cannot be allowed to be paralysed by adjournments and nondemonstration of due diligence to deal with the matter. One cannot be oblivious to the feeling necessities of the time. No one can afford to sit in an ivory tower. Neither a Judge nor a lawyer can ignore the total push and pressure of the cosmos‖. It is devastating to expect infinite patience. Change of attitude is the warrant and command of the day. We may recall with profit what Justice Cardozo had said: It is true, I think, today in every d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om the illustrious Justice Frankfurter is fruitful to recapitulate: I think a person who throughout his life is nothing but a practising lawyer fulfils a very great and essential function in the life of society. Think of the responsibilities on the one hand, and the satisfaction on the other, to be a lawyer in the true sense. [ Felix Frankfurter, Proceedings in Honor of Mr. Justice Frankfurter and Distinguished Allumni, Occasional Pamphlet No.3 (Harvard Law School, Cambridge, 1960), pp. 45] 28. In a democratic setup, intrinsic and embedded faith in the adjudicatory system is of seminal and pivotal concern. Delay gradually declines the citizenry faith in the system. It is the faith and faith alone that keeps the system alive. It provides oxygen constantly. Fragmentation of faith has the effect potentiality to bring in a state of cataclysm where justice may become a casualty. A litigant expects a reasoned verdict from a temperate Judge but does not intend to and, rightly so, to guillotine much of time at the altar of reasons. 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 dee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... observed that : (SCC p. 563, para 9) 9. An advocate stands in a loco parentis towards the litigants and it therefore follows that the client is entitled to receive disinterested, sincere and honest treatment especially where the client approaches the advocate for succour in times of need. 19. In Lt. Col. S.J. Chaudhary v. State (Delhi Admn.) [(1984) 1 SCC 722 : 1984 SCC (Cri) 163 : AIR 1984 SC 618] , a threeJudge Bench, while dealing with the role of an advocate in a criminal trial, has observed as follows : (SCC pp. 72324, para 3) 3. We are unable to appreciate the difficulty said to be experienced by the petitioner. It is stated that his advocate is finding it difficult to attend the court from day to day. It is the duty of every advocate, who accepts the brief in a criminal case to attend the trial from day to day. We cannot overstress the duty of the advocate to attend to the trial from day to day. Having accepted the brief, he will be committing a breach of his professional duty, if he so fails to attend. 20. In Mahabir Prasad Singh [(1999) 1 SCC 37 : AIR 1999 SC 287], the Bench, laying emphasis on the obligation of a lawyer in his duty towards the Court and the duty of the Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estionably true that courtesy breeds courtesy and just as charity has to begin at home, courtesy must begin with the Judge. A discourteous Judge is like an illtuned instrument in the setting of a courtroom. But members of the Bar will do well to remember that such flagrant violations of professional ethics and cultured conduct will only result in the ultimate destruction of a system without which no democracy can survive.‖ 5.5 Today the judiciary and the justice delivery system is facing acute problem of delay which ultimately affects the right of the litigant to access to justice and the speedy trial. Arrears are mounting because of such delay and dilatory tactics and asking repeated adjournments by the advocates and mechanically and in routine manner granted by the courts. It cannot be disputed that due to delay in access to justice and not getting the timely justice it may shaken the trust and confidence of the litigants in the justice delivery system. Many a times, the task of adjournments is used to kill Justice. Repeated adjournments break the back of the litigants. The courts are enjoying upon to perform their duties with the object of strengthening the confidence of c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
