Returning a Defective Appeal Memo: English Draft Under Review
You handle correspondence in the office of the Chief Judicial Magistrate. An appeal memo filed by a party acting in person has been returned by the stamp reporter with three curable objections: two missing annexures and an unsigned verification. The party is not represented by counsel and has no email address on the file, so the letter will be posted and must be readable by a lay person. The next date fixed is 12.08.2024 in Court No. 3 at 11:00 a.m. A junior drafts the letter as follows:
"The appellant is hereby informed that his appeal has been rejected due to non-compliance of the office objections. You are requested to kindly comply the objections and appear on the next date otherwise your case will be dismissed. The matter is listed on 12.08.2024 at 11:00 AM in Court No. 3 hence you should appear personally."
1. Identify the defects in the draft, separating grammar faults from legal-accuracy and register faults.
Read the worked answer
Grammar: non-compliance of should be non-compliance with; comply the objections should be comply with the objections; hence you should appear is a comma splice ("...Court No. 3, and you should appear...").
Legal accuracy: rejected is wrong - a memo returned for curable defects has not been adjudicated; it is returned, or not entertained at this stage, and may be liable to be rejected if not cured. Otherwise your case will be dismissed states a consequence the office cannot guarantee and which the law does not impose for a curable defect.
Register and audience: the letter mixes third person (the appellant is hereby informed) with second person (you are requested); it should hold one register. His assumes the appellant's gender, which is not drawn from the record; use the appellant. Appear personally is wrong for a party who may engage counsel, and kindly is over-polite filler in an office letter that must be clear. The reader is unrepresented, so each objection should be listed as an item, not compressed into one clause.
2. Rewrite the letter body in about 60–80 words in a single, formal register.
Read the worked answer
"Your appeal, presented in this office, has been returned to you for the cure of the following objections: (i) annexures 'A' and 'B' are not attached; (ii) the verification at the end of the memo is not signed.
You are directed to cure the said objections and to file the memo in Court No. 3 on 12.08.2024 at 11:00 a.m., either in person or through an advocate. If the objections are not cured by that date, the memo will be placed before the Court for appropriate orders."
The changes are deliberate: returned for cure instead of rejected; the objections are numbered so a lay reader can act on them; comply with is correctly governed; a single address form is kept throughout; and may be placed before the Court for appropriate orders replaces a threat the office has no power to make.
3. Is it right to set out a consequence at all, and should the party be told to appear "personally"? Give reasons.
Read the worked answer
Yes, set out a consequence, but only one the office can actually state. A party who is simply told to cure objections has no sense of urgency and may lose the date; a party told the appeal "will be dismissed" has been misled about a discretionary judicial act that has not happened and may not follow. The correct line is procedural and true: if the objections are not cured, the matter will be placed before the Court for orders. That is accurate, it preserves the office's neutrality, and it tells the reader that inaction has a cost.
"Personally" should not be used. An appeal may be prosecuted through counsel, and directing personal appearance in a routine objection letter is both unnecessary and, if the party is ill or far away, unfair. Say "in person or through an advocate", which conveys the same date without imposing a condition the office cannot enforce. The judgement is consistency between what the letter says and what the file actually permits.