<b>Letters:</b> Adjournment havoc

This refers to the Sukumar Mukhopadhyay's article "Adjournment should not be used to cause delay" (Expert Eye, July 1). The Bombay High Court in the case of the Commissioner of Central Excise versus Techno Economic Services Private Ltd has rightly observed that despite engaging many advocates, adjournments are sought, which result in payment of heavy professional charges to the advocates. Advocates are the main impediments in the early disposal of cases. They mint money by taking too many adjournments to prolong the cases. They do not collect professional charges by cheque or demand drafts or by credit to their account to avoid taxes. Only cash payment is accepted. The government should allot a certain time frame to the judges to deliver judgments. Granting adjournments on frivolous grounds has been the main cause of delay. The delay in civil suits is all the more pronounced.

Frequent adjournments not only contribute to the swelling number of cases pending in courts but also places the defendant in the comfort zone at the suffering of the petitioner. Advocates are insensitive to the suffering of the clients who depend on them. They do not respond to calls from their clients and keep their phone numbers for identification purpose only. Judicial reforms are absolutely necessary for the expeditious disposal of cases.

K V Seetharamaiah Karnataka

Letters can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to:
The Editor, Business Standard
Nehru House, 4 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg
New Delhi 110 002
Fax: (011) 23720201
E-mail: letters@bsmail.in
All letters must have a postal address and telephone number