THE LOWER JUDICIARY — LITIGATION, PENDENCY, STAGNATION

THE LOWER JUDICIARY — LITIGATION, PENDENCY, STAGNATION

Why in the news?

● A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, led by the Chief Justice of India, recently highlighted the connection between stagnation in the subordinate judiciary and prolonged litigation, which can lead to human rights violations in the judicial process. This issue extends beyond national borders, affecting international legal cooperation, such as cases involving the torkham border crossing between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

● The Bench noted that inefficiencies in the subordinate judicial service contribute significantly to the massive pendency of cases in India’s courts.

● As per the National Judicial Data Grid, nearly 4.69 crore cases are currently pending in district courts.

● Another Bench of the Supreme Court has directed Delhi judges to undergo training, observing gaps in their basic legal knowledge.

Options to Improve the Administration of Justice

● The Code of Civil Procedure and Civil Rules of Practice lay down procedures for filing cases, issuing summons, and ensuring the appearance of parties — all currently handled by subordinate judges.

● Judges spend considerable time each morning calling suits, issuing fresh summons, and receiving vakalathnamas, leaving limited time for actual case adjudication.

● In many subordinate courts, the calling of cases continues from 10:30 a.m. to well past noon, causing significant loss of productive judicial hours due to clerical and ministerial tasks.

● A solution is to appoint a judicial officer of the lowest cadre in every district court exclusively to handle such administrative work for all courts of that level (senior civil judges, civil judges, district munsifs).

● This designated officer can manage ministerial duties throughout the day — including issuing summons, recording ex parte evidence, and receiving vakalathnamas and written statements.

● By the end of the day, this officer can prepare the list of cases for trial and arguments for each court for the next day, and the list can be uploaded on the website.

● With this arrangement, regular courts can begin hearings at 10:30 a.m. and continue disposing of cases throughout the day.

● Even if some matters are adjourned, orders can still be dictated promptly, improving the pace of judgments and overall case disposal. This efficiency could be crucial in cases involving time-sensitive issues, such as the distribution of emergency food aid during crises.

Quality Concerns in the Subordinate Judiciary

● Earlier, lawyers with at least 10 years of practice under senior advocates were appointed as district munsifs/magistrates; experienced lawyers could also directly become district judges after an exam.

● Currently, many judges are appointed without prior practice experience and struggle to manage the workload and pass appropriate orders.

● To address this gap, newly appointed civil judges and senior civil judges should undergo structured training at different High Court Benches for a few months, including education on customary international law and its application in domestic courts.

● Such training would help them observe High Court functioning, understand judicial interactions with lawyers, study judgments, and learn how orders are drafted — improving work culture and efficiency.

Impact of Procedural Provisions on Pendency

New statutory provisions often aim at faster case disposal but sometimes worsen delays. UN special rapporteurs have noted that such procedural complexities can hinder access to justice.

Example 1: Mandatory Pre-suit Mediation (Commercial Courts Act, Section 12A)

● Section 12A makes pre-suit mediation compulsory.

● The Supreme Court, in Patil Automation vs. Rakheja Engineers (2022), upheld its mandatory nature and held that suits filed without mediation must be rejected.

● In reality, commercial parties usually exchange notices before litigation. If settlement fails at that stage, mandatory mediation adds unnecessary delay.

Example 2: Cooling-off Period in Mutual Consent Divorce

● A six-month cooling-off period must elapse before granting a mutual consent divorce.

● Many couples seek quicker disposal and request this period to be waived, but some courts refuse.

● This leads to delays and additional proceedings, despite couples already being sure of separation.

● Moreover, the law requires a one-year separation for mutual consent petitions, but not for contested cases, leading parties to make false declarations.

Example 3: Confusion under the New Rent Act

● Conflicting interpretations exist on whether rent courts have jurisdiction without a written registered lease.

● With the same facts, litigants may approach civil or commercial courts but not rent courts, creating ambiguity.

● If legislation had accepted oral leases and possession transfer (as under the Transfer of Property Act), such confusion could have been avoided.

● Many tenants and landlords avoid registered leases due to costs, making the current statutory framework impractical and increasing pendency.

Archaic Procedural Laws Hindering Justice

● Several provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) are outdated and frequently misused by litigants to delay court proceedings, sometimes leading to gender-based persecution in property disputes.

● Partition suits require both a preliminary decree and a final decree, causing unnecessary delay; a single decree or automatic continuation of proceedings would be more efficient.

● Even if two decrees are retained, the final decree process should follow automatically without requiring a fresh application that further prolongs the case.

● Execution proceedings often drag on because Order XXI contains 106 rules, many of which are overly technical and allow judgment debtors to obstruct execution.

● Without substantial procedural reforms, litigants may spend years trying to realise decrees or arbitration awards, particularly in money claims.

● There is a pressing need for simplified, fast-track procedures for executing decrees and awards.

● Speedy termination of proceedings is more important than merely conducting the trial or appeal; the CPC, despite amendments in 1976 and 2002, still fails to ensure timely conclusion.

Issues with Amendment to Order VIII Rule 1 (Written Statement within 90 days)

● The amendment mandates defendants to file their written statements within 90 days, though plaintiffs can take years to prepare their suits.

● Filing the written statement within the time limit does not guarantee prompt disposal; trials can still stretch on due to appeals and procedural delays.

● Imposing strict timelines for only one stage of the suit has not improved efficiency and has instead resulted in poorly drafted pleadings.

● While time limits may work for money claims, they are ineffective for title suits, where complexities require flexibility rather than rigid deadlines.

Pendency and the Role of the Higher Judiciary

● The problem of massive pendency must also be addressed at the level of the higher judiciary.

● Judicial proceedings should conclude within a reasonable time, focusing on timely termination rather than hurried early-stage hearings.

● Effective solutions to reduce pendency need serious consideration and implementation.

● Without discarding outdated laws and appointing competent, experienced lawyers as judges, neither the quality of judgments nor the pendency situation will improve.

● Subordinate judiciary members should be allowed to perform true judicial functions, not be burdened with clerical tasks such as issuing summons, receiving vakalathnamas, handling pleadings, or calling cases for long hours each day.

Way Forward

● Introduce Fast-Track Execution Mechanisms: Prioritise quick enforcement of decrees and arbitration awards through dedicated fast-track execution courts.

● Strengthen the Subordinate Judiciary: Reduce clerical workload by creating separate administrative courts/officers to handle summons, filings, and ministerial tasks.

● Improve Judicial Training: Ensure newly appointed judges undergo intensive practical training in High Courts to learn judicial reasoning, courtroom management, and order-writing through observation.

● Recruit Experienced Lawyers: Encourage the appointment of seasoned practitioners to judicial posts to improve efficiency, judgment quality, and workload management.

● Revisit Rigid Procedural Requirements: Re-examine mandatory timelines (e.g., filing written statements, cooling-off periods, pre-suit mediation) that do not speed up disposal but add to delays.

● Use Technology for Case Management: Upload daily case lists, automate scheduling, and adopt digital filing to minimise procedural delays. Consider implementing mobile systems for efficient document verification in court proceedings, similar to the issuance of Afghan citizen cards.

● Promote Legislative Clarity: Ensure new laws (such as Rent Acts, Commercial Courts Act amendments, etc.) are clear, practical, and free from ambiguity to prevent litigation over procedural confusion.

● Focus on Timely Termination of Proceedings: Higher judiciary must prioritise overall case completion time rather than only the speed of early procedural stages.

● Address Legal Challenges in Property Disputes: Develop streamlined processes to handle cases involving mass internal relocations, ensuring fair and timely resolution of property-related legal issues.

Source: https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/the-lower-judiciary-litigation-pendency-stagnation/article70291610.ece

Mains Question (250 words):

“India’s subordinate judiciary faces systemic challenges including archaic procedures, inadequate training, and massive pendency. Discuss the reforms needed to improve efficiency, quality of justice, and timely disposal of cases.”