Chandigarh, May 05 In a suggestion that would prove a time-saver for two parties involved in a litigation, the Punjab and Haryana High Court today recommended use of e-mails to send petitions and receive replies.
The recommendation was made keeping in view the inordinate delay caused in most cases. At present, almost every other case is adjourned on the plea that the reply filed by one party has not been received by the other. After the issuance of notices in a case, when a party files a reply, the opposite party seeks adjournment on the grounds that it has not received the copy of the reply. This results in long adjournments and long litigation.
A similar situation was witnessed today by the Bench comprising Justice K S Garewal and Justice Daya Chaudhary. Adjournment was sought by the state of Punjab on the grounds that it had not received the copy of the counter affidavit filed by the complainant in the case. Highlighting the need to dispose of cases expeditiously, Justice Garewal questioned the law officer appearing on behalf of the state government, “Don’t Punjab law officers have e-mails?. Why don’t you people send and receive copies of replies via e-mails?. This will save time for the court. Tell your Advocate General (AG) to give all law officers e-mail i.ds.”
Justice Garewal further remarked that much time is wasted in the exercise of handing over the hard copy of a petition to an opposite party. “Not only is this time-consuming, but highly unproductive,” the Judge remarked.
Seconds after the recommendation was made, the case filed by eight BJP municipal councillors demanding abolition of paid parking came up for hearing. Yet again adjournment was sought by the complainant party on the grounds that the reply filed by the UT Administration (opposite party) in the case was not received.
Justice Garewal asked the same question to the counsel appearing for the UT Administration. The judge also questioned whether e-filing was allowed in the High Court. The Court was told that though it is allowed, the actual implementation hasn’t started yet. “Let’s have paperless courts here.” the Bench observed.
RAGHAV OHRI
Posted online: Tuesday , May 06, 2008 at 12:31:54Updated: Tuesday , May 06, 2008 at 12:31:54
http://www.expressindia.com/
About Me
- Kamal Kumar Pandey (Adv. Supreme Court of India)
- Lawyer Practising at Supreme Court of India. Court Experience: Criminal, Civil & PIL (related to Property, Tax, Custom & Duties, MVAC, insurance, I.P.R., Copyrights & Trademarks, Partnerships, Labour Disputes, etc.) Socio-Legal: Child Rights, Mid Day Meal Programme, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan, Women Rights, Against Female Foeticide, P.R.Is, Bonded Labour, Child labour, Child marriage, Domestic violence, Legal Literacy, HIV/AIDS, etc. Worked for Legal Aid/Advise/Awareness/Training/Empowerment/Interventions/Training & Sensitisation.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comment