Board of Sixty-One Items and a Widow Without Counsel
You are Civil Judge (Junior Division), Moga. Your board for the day lists 61 items. Item 23 is a suit for permanent injunction in which the plaintiff has already had four adjournments for evidence; today his counsel, a junior of a senior advocate, seeks a fifth adjournment on the ground that his witness is in Canada and will 'join by video conference shortly'. Item 24 is a suit in which the defendant, a 68-year-old widow, appears in person and alleges that her own counsel took Rs 20,000 and has stopped appearing; her counsel is absent. At 12.00 noon the advocate in Item 23 asks that his matter be taken up after lunch because he must appear before the Punjab and Haryana High Court through video conferencing at 12.30 pm. In the criminal roster, an 80-year-old witness has been waiting since 10.00 am.
1. How would you deal with the fifth adjournment request and the advocate's request for a post-lunch slot? State what you would record.
Read the worked answer
The fifth adjournment falls squarely within the proviso to Order XVII Rule 1 CPC: after three adjournments the court shall not grant a further adjournment unless it is satisfied that the party could not produce the witness for reasons beyond his control, and costs are mandatory. The ground offered is not of that kind. A witness in Canada cannot 'join by video conference shortly' as a matter of course; evidence from abroad requires either a commission under Order XXVI CPC with the prescribed process through the Ministry of External Affairs, or permission under the High Court's video conferencing rules, with proper identity verification and notice to the other side. Nothing of that kind appears on the file. I would refuse the adjournment, record that four earlier adjournments were granted and that the ground now urged is one the party created for itself, impose costs, and proceed under Order XVII Rule 3 to decide the suit on the evidence already recorded, giving the plaintiff one short opportunity only if he produces the witness within a fixed time at his own cost.
On the post-lunch request, the record should note the request and the reason without comment on the advocate's standing. Judicial courtesy does not require the board to be rearranged at the convenience of one counsel. I would tell him that Item 23 will be called when reached, and if it is reached before 12.30 pm, the matter will be heard then; no preferential listing is being granted.
2. What steps would you take regarding the unrepresented widow and her allegation against her counsel?
Read the worked answer
The first duty is to ensure she is not prejudiced. I would not proceed ex parte against a defendant who is present and unrepresented; I would adjourn her item to a short date, record her statement in open court about her counsel's non-appearance and the payment, and direct notice to the counsel to appear on the next date and explain. If she wishes to engage another counsel, I would give her time to do so; if she cannot afford one, I would refer her to the District Legal Services Authority for free legal aid, which is her right and not a favour.
On the allegation of taking money and abandoning the case, the court does not adjudicate a fee dispute. But professional misconduct is a matter for the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana, and if the allegation is repeated on oath, I would record it and forward a copy to the Bar Council for such action as it deems fit, after giving the counsel an opportunity to respond on the next date. I would not comment on the merits of the allegation in open court, because that would prejudge it.
Throughout, the record should show that the court was alive to the inequality of the parties and took steps to cure it, not merely that an adjournment was granted.
3. How do you ensure the elderly witness is not prejudiced while managing the board?
Read the worked answer
The witness's convenience is a legitimate ground for taking up a matter out of turn. Courts routinely take up the evidence of elderly, ill or outstation witnesses first, and there is no rule that the board must be called in serial order. I would call the criminal case in which the 80-year-old is present at the earliest opportunity, record his evidence in full, and note in the order that it was taken up out of turn because of his age and the time he had already waited. If the accused or his counsel is not present, the evidence cannot be recorded in their absence; I would issue a short notice and ensure the witness is not made to return repeatedly.
Practical court management supports this: seating, water and a short break for an elderly witness are not indulgences but the minimum a court owes to a person compelled to attend. I would also record why the witness was not examined earlier, so that the delay is not attributed to him later.
The underlying principle is that a judge manages a board, not a queue. Recording reasons for the priority given, and for the refusal of the fifth adjournment, protects the order in revision and demonstrates that discretion was exercised judicially and not out of irritation or influence.