HC judge expresses displeasure over too many adjournments

HC judge expresses displeasure over too many adjournments

High Court judge Justice N Kumar on Friday expressed displeasure over the way advocates were seeking adjournment in the matters listed before him, with counsel only appearing with a memo in their hand to seek adjournment giving vague reasons.

 Over 100 matters pertaining to Regular First Appeal (RFA), Civil Contempt Petition (CCC), Review Petition (RP) among others that were listed before a division bench headed by Justice Kumar were heard in just over 50 minutes in the court hall. 

The bench said that RFA matters are the real litigation property matters and they come with stacks of files and documents and orders from the lower court.  “The judges read all the documents and come prepared to hear the arguments, but is it very unfortunate that advocates are not prepared to make their submissions,” the bench observed.  Coming down heavily on the government counsel, the bench said that they were acting like clerks and are involved in manipulating the case. 

The bench said that if the judges finish and rise early, they (counsel) blame the presiding officers of the courts, saying that “they do not have much knowledge about the law in these cases, many times they only sleep during the hearing, they could be easily bribed and think that we are idiots. But what can the judges do if the advocates are not ready?” 

During the hearing, the bench recorded the excuses given by the advocates seeking adjournment.  One of the advocates said that the senior counsel fell from the stairs and was unable to walk, the bench recorded the submission and adjourned the hearing. 

In another case the advocate stated that the senior counsel was busy and was unable to make it for the hearing.

The bench said that, “The general public were losing respect in judiciary due to the behaviour of the advocates.  The government officials have no respect for the court orders and they wake up only when a contempt petition is filed. As judges, it is our duty to uphold the law and not sit here to please a few advocates.” It is very unfortunate that though the judges are ready to dispose of matters, the advocates are only seeking adjournments and not a single case has been decided in this court,” the bench observed.