๐๐๐ฃ๐จ๐ฎ๐ซ๐ง๐ฆ๐๐ง๐ญ๐ฌ ๐๐๐ง๐ง๐จ๐ญ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ฆ๐๐ง๐๐๐ ๐๐ฌ ๐ ๐๐๐ญ๐ญ๐๐ซ ๐จ๐ ๐๐ข๐ ๐ก๐ญ: ๐๐
In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court has very emphatically held that the adjournment culture, which has plagued the litigation system, especially the civil courts, must be ended now. The Court was hearing a case in which an order passed in 2005, almost 18 years ago, was under challenge. While the case is yet to be decided. The matter before the Court was that the petitioner’s right to examination in chief had been struck down by the trial court for non-appearance and not proceeding with the case on the date fixed for such proceeding. The petitioner had not submitted an application nor has orally given any cogent reason for being unable to proceed with the case. Thus, the trial court struck down his right of examination in chief and proceeded with the case. Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached the High Court and then the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition for being devoid of any reason and legal grounds. However, the Court thought it necessary to shed some light on Order XVII (17) Rule 1,2 and 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which deals with adjournments and its consequences.
The Court held that, for now on, for seeking an adjournment, a written application must be submitted by the party, stating reasons and grounds which are tenable in the eyes of law. The court should look into the application and the reasons mentioned therein and thereafter, should decide whether the adjournment should be allowed or not. The Supreme Court also emphasised that the courts must impose cost if the application is found devoid of any cogent reason. This is also up to the court whether or not to grant adjournment even a written application has been submitted.
The Court further explained that, as of the end of 2023, there were reportedly 2.26 million cases pending before the courts, out of which 82 percent, 1.86 million, cases were pending before the subordinate courts. One reason for this escalation in the caseload is the prevalent adjournment culture which has permeated the entire judicial system and has paralysedย it completely. To resolve this issue, the Supreme Court suggested imposing cost and requiring written application from the parties seeking adjournment.
The author judge of this important judgment is Honorable Justice Irfan Saadat Khan.
c.p._2849_l_2015