Non-cooperation of Bar with Trial Courts makes it difficult to deal with huge arrears: Supreme Court

Read Time: 05 minutes


Supreme Court has further observed that members of the Bar are expected to conduct themselves in a reasonable and fair manner and remember that fairness is the hallmark of great advocacy

The Supreme Court on Thursday noted that if members of Bar do not cooperate with Trial Courts, it will be very difficult for Courts to deal with the huge arrears of cases.

"While a trial is being conducted, the members of the bar are expected to act as officers of the court. They are expected to conduct themselves in a reasonable and fair manner. The members of the bar must remember that fairness is a hallmark of great advocacy...", a bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Rajesh Bindal has held.

Top Court made these observations while hearing a plea by the party before it who had sought for a permanent injunction against another liqour company from infringing copyright in its artistic label by reproducing the label.

The bench noted certain disturbing features about the conduct of a member of the Bar while the trial was being conducted in this case. 

About the cross examination of a witness by the trial court, the trial judge recorded in his order,

"Ld. Adv. Mr. XXX (name masked) for plaintiffs is taking objections for each and every question while noting down the same also his objection continues. In this way series of objections taken by him is going on. Every time it is not possible for the court to record each and every objection, therefore, the court has adopted the procedure to record at important place, the question put to the witness and answer given by him, in question-answer manner as it is..".

The bench opined that a perusal of the data available on the National Judicial Data Grid, showed that there was a huge pendency of suits in the trial courts in the state of Maharashtra. In this backdrop, it said,

"If the advocates start objecting to every question asked in the cross-examination, the trial cannot go on smoothly. The trial gets delayed. In the facts of the case, looking at the persistent objections raised by the learned advocate, the court was required to record a substantial part of the cross-examination in question and answer form which consumed a lot of time of the court."

After making such observations, court went on to dismiss the appeal filed against the High Court's order whereby the trial court's grant of permanent injunction to the appellant in the present case was confirmed.

Case Title: Brihan Karan Sugar Syndicate Private Limited vs. Yashwantrao Mohite Krushna Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana