Only Five Percent of Indians Go to Courts!!!

I would say avoidance of litigation is nether feasible nor the decision a perfectly sound one. What are you left to do when all your reasonable overtures to reach an amicable solution are spurned stubbornly. The judiciary in India is getting close to dysfunctional and it must clean up its acts to restore and faith of the people of India. But then who cares to listen to this??

I am also among 95%. I feel that the luckiest is one who does not go to court, doctor and railway station. These are also interlinked. Quarrel leads to injury and litigation and litigation needs travel.

Yes you are lucky one. Haplessly I faced some court proceeding in younger age. Very painful.

This is obvious for general public.

Moreover if you are in acute problem. You have sufficient evidences and a good lawyer then court proceedings are beneficial.

Yes it may be beneficial if case is decided within time. It is very hard in India. Very time consuming.

What I have always felt that if our lawmakers only took the bylaws out of the book, it will be lot more easier for lawman to know what are they at and so will be for litigants those found lost in the jungle of complicacies of laws and bylaws.

In fact, the acts passed by parliament are not so elaborate. These authorize the executive to frame laws under the main act. This is called delegated legislation. also certain acts are on matters which are state subject or in concurrent list. State govts. also frame law on such matters. The delegated legislation is not totally unavoidable. In fact, often law framed under the main act is more in use than the main act. It is good to make law simple but there is limit to simplicity. Most simple would be to abolis all law and revert to Panchayat system treating 'panch' asd 'parmeshwar' whose opinion and not the written text will prtevail.

You are absolutely right the main acts only provide the framework and the administrative parts are taken care of by the rules and regulations formulated under the mandate of enabling provisions of the main acts. Judicial decisions taken by courts which come within the purview of the doctrine of 'Stare Decisis' also form a substantial part in making judicial decisions. There are conflicting rulings of the court of the same stature or by the same court. In India a good number of lawyers don't update their knowledge and exploit clients on procedural matters. Adjournment of cases on frivolous grounds happens to be the single most area of breeding corruption. A defendant with a weak case is allowed to get away for any number of years.

What I have always felt that if our lawmakers only took the bylaws out of the book, it will be lot more easier for lawman to know what are they at and so will be for litigants those found lost in the jungle of complicacies of laws and bylaws.

In fact, the acts passed by parliament are not so elaborate. These authorize the executive to frame laws under the main act. This is called delegated legislation. also certain acts are on matters which are state subject or in concurrent list. State govts. also frame law on such matters. The delegated legislation is not totally unavoidable. In fact, often law framed under the main act is more in use than the main act. It is good to make law simple but there is limit to simplicity. Most simple would be to abolis all law and revert to Panchayat system treating 'panch' asd 'parmeshwar' whose opinion and not the written text will prtevail.

You are absolutely right the main acts only provide the framework and the administrative parts are taken care of by the rules and regulations formulated under the mandate of enabling provisions of the main acts. Judicial decisions taken by courts which come within the purview of the doctrine of 'Stare Decisis' also form a substantial part in making judicial decisions. There are conflicting rulings of the court of the same stature or by the same court. In India a good number of lawyers don't update their knowledge and exploit clients on procedural matters. Adjournment of cases on frivolous grounds happens to be the single most area of breeding corruption. A defendant with a weak case is allowed to get away for any number of years.

Give a particular case to 4-5 different courts simultaneously and you will come with different results with different arguments. This is happening because no one is sure about the by laws. they can turn things according to their own choice and anticipation. If this was not the case, why then judgments of different courts are questioned or quashed by other courts. It's a clear case of complicacies or the laws and bylaws have no clear meaning of their own. It all has been left to reach to a decision as found fit by a particular judge or lawyer telling the court.

I think one urgent reform that could impart the much-needed speed in the delivery system could be to create provisions for fast-tracking individual cases. Any party in a litigation particularly a plaintiff who is willing to bear the extra fees and other costs and hearing could be arranged on a daily basis. I am sure many defendants who plan to frustrate fast delivery of justice by succeeding adjourning a case on filmiest of grounds could be tackled more effectively. About the extra cost that this measure would entail, that would be a fraction of what one has to incur over a few decades in a case!!!

I think if the percentage increases even more cases will remain pending as still there are lots of cases pending in the courts when still 5% people go to court. :laugh:

I think one urgent reform that could impart the much-needed speed in the delivery system could be to create provisions for fast-tracking individual cases. Any party in a litigation particularly a plaintiff who is willing to bear the extra fees and other costs and hearing could be arranged on a daily basis. I am sure many defendants who plan to frustrate fast delivery of justice by succeeding adjourning a case on filmiest of grounds could be tackled more effectively. About the extra cost that this measure would entail, that would be a fraction of what one has to incur over a few decades in a case!!!

In that case law will go into the hands of who can pay for it. the need is to make the laws simple and speedup the process. Adjournments/dates should be allowed when absolutely necessary.

I 'm talking abt. civil cases where there is hardly the role of police, and those cases prolonged for generations as most of the time due to lawyers.

I 'm talking abt. civil cases where there is hardly the role of police, and those cases prolonged for generations as most of the time due to lawyers.

Its not proper to throw the blame entirely on Lawyers even in civil cases. For some people winning a court case against a rival is taken as a prestige. They force the lawyers to take the case to any extent.

What I have always felt that if our lawmakers only took the bylaws out of the book, it will be lot more easier for lawman to know what are they at and so will be for litigants those found lost in the jungle of complicacies of laws and bylaws.

In fact, the acts passed by parliament are not so elaborate. These authorize the executive to frame laws under the main act. This is called delegated legislation. also certain acts are on matters which are state subject or in concurrent list. State govts. also frame law on such matters. The delegated legislation is not totally unavoidable. In fact, often law framed under the main act is more in use than the main act. It is good to make law simple but there is limit to simplicity. Most simple would be to abolis all law and revert to Panchayat system treating 'panch' asd 'parmeshwar' whose opinion and not the written text will prtevail.

No, I did not mean to go as far back as Panchayat system, although Mahatma Gandhi thought this system was best for our country. I only wanted to say that if the law was made a little easier, within common-man's reach, it would save complications. But if you ask me in the end it is still the Panch-Parmeshwar- see a larger bench comprising 2-3-5-7 Judges almost act like Panch Parmeshwar.

In fact, I prefer the Panchayat system. It is possible to reintroduce panchayat system and empower the panchayats to deal with petty offences. But this should be optional. May be many would benefit from this. Also some work of the courts will be reduced.

What I have always felt that if our lawmakers only took the bylaws out of the book, it will be lot more easier for lawman to know what are they at and so will be for litigants those found lost in the jungle of complicacies of laws and bylaws.

In fact, the acts passed by parliament are not so elaborate. These authorize the executive to frame laws under the main act. This is called delegated legislation. also certain acts are on matters which are state subject or in concurrent list. State govts. also frame law on such matters. The delegated legislation is not totally unavoidable. In fact, often law framed under the main act is more in use than the main act. It is good to make law simple but there is limit to simplicity. Most simple would be to abolis all law and revert to Panchayat system treating 'panch' asd 'parmeshwar' whose opinion and not the written text will prtevail.

No, I did not mean to go as far back as Panchayat system, although Mahatma Gandhi thought this system was best for our country. I only wanted to say that if the law was made a little easier, within common-man's reach, it would save complications. But if you ask me in the end it is still the Panch-Parmeshwar- see a larger bench comprising 2-3-5-7 Judges almost act like Panch Parmeshwar.

In fact, I prefer the Panchayat system. It is possible to reintroduce panchayat system and empower the panchayats to deal with petty offences. But this should be optional. May be many would benefit from this. Also some work of the courts will be reduced.

Panhacyat raj system will create panic as most members have political affiliations, and this will create partiality.

I think one urgent reform that could impart the much-needed speed in the delivery system could be to create provisions for fast-tracking individual cases. Any party in a litigation particularly a plaintiff who is willing to bear the extra fees and other costs and hearing could be arranged on a daily basis. I am sure many defendants who plan to frustrate fast delivery of justice by succeeding adjourning a case on filmiest of grounds could be tackled more effectively. About the extra cost that this measure would entail, that would be a fraction of what one has to incur over a few decades in a case!!!

That really would be helpful especially in civil cases which seem to drag on for decades togther ! however, I see that the family court is doing a good job at least here in my city. Someone knowmn to me was entangled in a maintenance case which was settled withing 9 months and the lady got interim maintenence within a month after the case was filed... According to the judges there is a dearth of spavce in most district courts and also there are not enough qualified judges which delays the proceedings

Court proceedings are not that much easy. Court proceedings are good for the rich people. They can take the benefit of laws easily but not the general public.

I think one urgent reform that could impart the much-needed speed in the delivery system could be to create provisions for fast-tracking individual cases. Any party in a litigation particularly a plaintiff who is willing to bear the extra fees and other costs and hearing could be arranged on a daily basis. I am sure many defendants who plan to frustrate fast delivery of justice by succeeding adjourning a case on filmiest of grounds could be tackled more effectively. About the extra cost that this measure would entail, that would be a fraction of what one has to incur over a few decades in a case!!!

That really would be helpful especially in civil cases which seem to drag on for decades togther ! however, I see that the family court is doing a good job at least here in my city. Someone knowmn to me was entangled in a maintenance case which was settled withing 9 months and the lady got interim maintenence within a month after the case was filed... According to the judges there is a dearth of spavce in most district courts and also there are not enough qualified judges which delays the proceedings

I personally that judges of lower courts are irrationally liberal in granting adjournments without ever applying their minds to the motives of defendants and thereby causing interminable delays and escalation of costs to the benefit of lawyers and detriment of justice-seekers. Corruption among some judges of lower courts is also an impediment to speedier delivery of justice.

I think one urgent reform that could impart the much-needed speed in the delivery system could be to create provisions for fast-tracking individual cases. Any party in a litigation particularly a plaintiff who is willing to bear the extra fees and other costs and hearing could be arranged on a daily basis. I am sure many defendants who plan to frustrate fast delivery of justice by succeeding adjourning a case on filmiest of grounds could be tackled more effectively. About the extra cost that this measure would entail, that would be a fraction of what one has to incur over a few decades in a case!!!

That really would be helpful especially in civil cases which seem to drag on for decades togther ! however, I see that the family court is doing a good job at least here in my city. Someone knowmn to me was entangled in a maintenance case which was settled withing 9 months and the lady got interim maintenence within a month after the case was filed... According to the judges there is a dearth of spavce in most district courts and also there are not enough qualified judges which delays the proceedings

I personally that judges of lower courts are irrationally liberal in granting adjournments without ever applying their minds to the motives of defendants and thereby causing interminable delays and escalation of costs to the benefit of lawyers and detriment of justice-seekers. Corruption among some judges of lower courts is also an impediment to speedier delivery of justice.

This is very true. In some cases, judges get money to delay the decision of the cases. They keep delaying the date of the herrings. Court's decisions are delayed so much that the person who has complaint may die before the judgement and the case gets dismissed.

I think one urgent reform that could impart the much-needed speed in the delivery system could be to create provisions for fast-tracking individual cases. Any party in a litigation particularly a plaintiff who is willing to bear the extra fees and other costs and hearing could be arranged on a daily basis. I am sure many defendants who plan to frustrate fast delivery of justice by succeeding adjourning a case on filmiest of grounds could be tackled more effectively. About the extra cost that this measure would entail, that would be a fraction of what one has to incur over a few decades in a case!!!

That really would be helpful especially in civil cases which seem to drag on for decades togther ! however, I see that the family court is doing a good job at least here in my city. Someone knowmn to me was entangled in a maintenance case which was settled withing 9 months and the lady got interim maintenence within a month after the case was filed... According to the judges there is a dearth of spavce in most district courts and also there are not enough qualified judges which delays the proceedings

I personally that judges of lower courts are irrationally liberal in granting adjournments without ever applying their minds to the motives of defendants and thereby causing interminable delays and escalation of costs to the benefit of lawyers and detriment of justice-seekers. Corruption among some judges of lower courts is also an impediment to speedier delivery of justice.

This is very true. In some cases, judges get money to delay the decision of the cases. They keep delaying the date of the herrings. Court's decisions are delayed so much that the person who has complaint may die before the judgement and the case gets dismissed.

I don't know why some of the judges of these courts actually encourage the stalling tactics adopted by the defendants to the great injustice afflicted on the plaintiffs!!!