Pro Bono

It may not be proper if I do not write about good things happening here in the courts. The High Court of Madras (not Chennai mind you) and the Government of Tamil Nadu have established in every district "Legal Aid Centres'.

Eminent Lawyers (and also lawyers like me) have empanelled their services in these centres. Any person who is unable to afford the cost of litigation may approach the Legal Aid Centres and will be provided all services free of charge. The Lawyer will be paid for the expenses of the case and a nominal fee by the Legal Aid Board.

That apart, if a person is able to prove that he is not possessed of any money to pay court fee, that he is indigent, the law itself provides for filing a case 'informa pauperis'. The Court fee payable will be recovered later if and when the indigent person succeds the case and is awarded any money or property as a result.

Thriptiyaa irukku

On the way

An employer is liable to pay (workmen) compensation for injuries sustained by a workman out of an accident during the course of employment.
This theory has been extended to accidents arising within the employer's premises if there is any connection between the accident and the employment. The employers premises is further extended notionally to any driveway, private roads or approach roads etc. Courts these days are liberal to award compensation to workmen sustaining injuries due to road accidents occurring on the way to work or back home under this notional extension theory.

The moral of the story is that 'Law is an ass"

Justice delayed is Justice denied

In India though there are not much of law suits filed for damages, most of the disputes in the country are family disputes, relating to partition and adoption etc., by sheer magnificence of population, We Indians litigate a lot, there used to be a saying that Indians not only are born in litigation and die, but also bequeth it.

At the present scenario we have only about 13 judges per million people. The Law Commission as early as in 1987 had recommended that the ratio must be increased to 50 per million but nothing has changed for the better in all these years.

The government have now established fast track courts to expediate the hearing and dispossal of cases, this is proving to be a progress towards speedy dispossal of cases.

As a lawyer I encounter one practical peril in the quick hearing of cases which is of adjournments. There is no firm rule or law which would curb seeking adjournments and hence the progress in the case could be seen only if both sides co operate with the courts and conduct cases without seeking adjournments on frivolous reasons.

It is not an exageration to say that a raw junior in Chennai is first trained in seeking adjournments giving all creative reasons including hospitalising his senior who is otherwise enjoying his snack in the canteen.

There are of course the other difficulties such as service of summons on the parties, filing of pleadings in time and rendering of judgment by the court. All these add up to the delay in justice.

The judicial system has now learned from its counterpart overseas and insists on Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) meathods before filing of suits in courts. Already in commercial contracts the parties prefer to resolve disputes arising out of the contract through arbitration than to approach the courts and wait endlessly for a decision on it.

For although in the recent years Information Technology has develpoed by leaps and bounds particularly in this part of the globe, there is not much of it catching up with the judiciary here. In all these years the major change that IT has brought about in our courts are that the judgments these days are printed using computers.(dot matrix printers only please)

For the volume of records to be kept and mnaintained, I am sure the RDBMS packages would certainly improve efficiency of the courts; but there needs a major change in mind set here too.

I am able to see computers in almost all courts I attend, but they are kept among the pile of case papers- unused. Only one computer savvy court staff I could see has put the computer provided in the court he works to best use he can think of by playing solitaire during lunch.

In or Out?

So many people have asked me, as to how is it reasonable that a decision rendered by one court could be reversed by another. That is to say if a person is found guilty by the court after trial, what are the justifications in letting him free by the appeal court in the same case.

Here is an attempt to disuss this position-

The courts of first instance are ordinarily ones which record evidence and dwell on the questions of fact. Any decision given by the trial court is keeping predominantly in view the evidence recorded and the fundamental principles of law.

Law vests a right of appeal before the appellate court to the party losing in the trial. But the scope of appeal is usually restricted to the errors and irregularities of the judgment (of the trial court). Re-appreciation of evidence is done only if the trial court while passing the judgment has ommitted to consider relevant portions of the evidence or based the same on perversities. The application of law (by way of statutes and case laws) is the major concern in the appeal courts.

While still holding that the facts in issue against the appellant, there are chances for him to be let free on technical grounds.

The prime reason is: the law firmly believes that only those proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt should be faulted.

May Maasam

Summer is here and almost all the courts have closed. My wife and kid have gone to my in laws' place.
Thanks to my new broadband connection I am spending time sort of usefully.
Happy vacation