Skip to content
Legal Research And Analysis

Legal Research And Analysis

Stay Connected! Stay Informed!

Primary Menu
  • ABOUT US
    • ORIENTATION 2023
  • ADVISORY BOARD
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • JOURNAL of LEGAL RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS
  • Submission Guidelines
  • Campus Ambassadors
  • UGC NET (LAW) COACHING & GUIDANCE
  • OUR CERTIFICATE COURSES
    • Certificate Course on Environmental Law
    • CERTIFICATE COURSE ON WOMEN’S RIGHTS
    • LRA HUMAN RIGHTS
    • CERTIFICATE PROGRAM ON MENTAL HEALTH
    • Certificate Course on Legal Research
    • CERTIFICATE COURSE ON LABOUR LAWS
    • Certificate Course on Intellectual Property Rights
    • CERTIFICATE COURSE ON AI AND LAW
    • Online Certificate Course On Contract Drafting
    • Online Certificate Course on Legal Drafting
    • Certificate Course on Cyber Law
  • CONTACT US
  • TERMS AND CONDITIONS
  • Home
  • Article
  • Kerala High Court shatters stereotypes, affirms judge’s productivity beyond daily case count
  • Article
  • current affairs

Kerala High Court shatters stereotypes, affirms judge’s productivity beyond daily case count

In a recent ruling, the Kerala High Court rejected the petition submitted by Advocate Yeshwanth Shenoy, who alleged that a specific judge was intentionally restricting the number of cases listed before the bench to a mere 20 matters per day.
Prashansa Agarwal 4:27 pm 4 min read
Kerala High Court shatters stereotypes, affirms judge's productivity beyond daily case count

Kerala High Court shatters stereotypes, affirms judge's productivity beyond daily case count

INTRODUCTION
In a recent ruling, the Kerala High Court rejected the petition submitted by Advocate Yeshwanth Shenoy, who alleged that a specific judge was intentionally restricting the number of cases listed before the bench to a mere 20 matters per day.

Kerala High Court shatters stereotypes, affirms judge's productivity beyond daily case count
source – Live Law

The court dismissed the petition, deeming it a baseless attempt to gain publicity and tarnish the reputation of both the judges and the judiciary. The petitioner claimed that Justice Mary Joseph, despite being the Master of Roster, did not possess the authority to instruct the Registry to curtail the list of cases.

RESPONSE OF COURT

Read moreIMPACT OF COVID-19 IN INDIA: AN AWFUL HISTORY STILL IN THE MAKING

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan, presiding over a single bench, made a significant observation regarding the distinction between the court of Justice Mary Joseph, primarily focused on hearings and an admission court. The court emphasized that a hearing court cannot be equated with an admission court, as the process of disposing of a hearing matter differs significantly from that of an admission matter. The court clarified that a judge’s ability to handle cases cannot be measured solely by the number of cases admitted or heard in a day. 

Furthermore, the court highlighted the inherent dissimilarity between an admission court, which may handle over 100 admissions daily, and a court dealing with hearings. It emphasized that a judge responsible for hearing matters cannot be expected to consider the same volume of cases as an admission court. The court acknowledged that hearings, particularly in the context of first appeals in criminal and civil matters, often require considerable time due to their continuation of the trial process.

Similarly, the court recognized that second appeals in civil matters and criminal revisions following the dismissal of an appeal by the appellate court also necessitate a substantial amount of time for proper disposition.  In essence, the court affirmed that the nature of the court proceedings, coupled with the complexity of certain cases, warrants an appropriate amount of time for a judge to fulfill their duties effectively.

Read moreARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND ITS IMPACT ON JOBS AND SOCIETY

MESSAGE TO THE LAWYERS

The court expressed concerns regarding the filing of writ petitions that compare the number of cases heard by different judges, highlighting that such actions would send misleading signals to society. It emphasized that lawyers, as officers of the court, possess knowledge of how the court handles various types of matters, such as admission matters, petition matters, and final hearing matters. The court asserted that there cannot be a rigid formula for case disposal, as each case must be decided based on its individual merits.  Additionally, the court addressed the petitioner’s argument, which pointed out that the court of Justice Mary Joseph was still considering item number 2 while the court hearing the petitioner had almost completed its list. The court expressed surprise at such an argument from a lawyer claiming to have 21 years of practice.

It clarified that Court No. 2D, being a hearing court, may require additional time to complete the hearings of first appeals in older matters.  The court emphasized that when a judge handles a case, they are dealing with the life of a citizen, and it is appropriate for it to take time. Furthermore, the court acknowledged that different judges may have varying approaches, such as some judges reading the case papers thoroughly before the proceedings to potentially skip the lawyer’s narration of the facts, while others prefer the facts to be presented directly by the lawyer. The court emphasized that such diverse attitudes among judges are acceptable, and there is no inherent problem with judges adopting different stances.

CONTENTION BY PETITIONER

During the proceedings, the petitioner argued that judges should consider their oath of office while deciding cases. In response, the court emphasized that every judge already approaches cases with the oath of office in mind, making it unnecessary for the petitioner to remind them.  The petitioner relied on a Facebook post by a former president of the Kerala High Court Association, Adv. Rajesh Vijayan, as evidence that Justice Mary Joseph had instructed a limit of 20 cases per day. However, the court criticized the petitioner for basing their argument on a Facebook post rather than presenting specific evidence or documents.

The court noted that Facebook posts often contain sarcasm, jokes, and spontaneous reactions, making them an unreliable source of evidence. The court highlighted that the person who made the Facebook post was not a party in the writ petition and unless that person confirmed its veracity, the court could not accept it as evidence. The court expressed confidence that no judge would give such a directive and restrict the number of cases to only 20.  Furthermore, the court stated that as a practicing lawyer with 21 years of experience, Shenoy should have addressed his concerns directly with the concerned judge, the Chief Justice, or through the High Court Advocates Association or the Senior Advocates Association. The court criticized the petitioner for filing the writ petition based on a Facebook post in an attempt to gain popularity and media attention.

Kerala High Court shatters stereotypes, affirms judge's productivity beyond daily case count
source – Live Law

The court questioned the message the petitioner intended to convey to society, emphasizing that judges and lawyers are integral parts of the judiciary, and internal problems can be addressed through established channels.  The court condemned the petitioner for making baseless allegations against a judge and considered imposing heavy costs in response. However, since the matter had not been admitted, the court refrained from imposing costs at that stage.

Please follow and like us:
error
fb-share-icon
Tweet
fb-share-icon
Tags: affirm beyond

Continue Reading

Previous: NDPS act mere virtual presence of accused not relevant if he’s not informed of prosecution’s plea for extension of detention: Kerala High Court
Next: Illegal Coke Plants: Meghalaya High Court Directs DGP To File Action Taken Report

Related Stories

The Burmese Crisis: The Socio-Political and Ethnic Aspects of the Conflict in Myanmar In August 2017, a deadly crackdown by Myanmar's army on Rohingya Muslims sent hundreds of thousands fleeing across the border into Bangladesh.
6 min read
  • current affairs

The Burmese Crisis: The Socio-Political and Ethnic Aspects of the Conflict in Myanmar

7:39 pm
Potential Outcomes if ICJ Rules Against Israel. Potential Outcomes if ICJ Rules Against Israel
6 min read
  • current affairs

Potential Outcomes if ICJ Rules Against Israel.

7:35 pm
OCEAN GATE TITAN: Legal Implication and Regulation for The Deep-sea exploration in International water. OCEAN GATE TITAN: Legal Implication and Regulation for The Deep-sea exploration in International water.
14 min read
  • Article
  • Research Paper

OCEAN GATE TITAN: Legal Implication and Regulation for The Deep-sea exploration in International water.

8:01 am

Categories

RECENT POSTS

  • G20 Leadership in Combating Climate Change: Challenges, Progress, and the Road Ahead
  • Locked Out and Left Behind: Examining Marginalization in Lucknow
  • Environmental Crimes and Legal Provisions
  • Cybercrime in Cross-Border Jurisdictions: Challenges and Solutions
  • Advancing Human Rights: Protecting Vulnerable Groups – Women, Children, Minorities, and Refugees

Empirical Research

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsL2WcsDuRU

Sign up

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
May 2025
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
« Apr    

You may have missed

G20 Leadership in Combating Climate Change: Challenges, Progress, and the Road Ahead Climate Change
11 min read
  • Journal of Legal Research and Analysis
  • Research Paper
  • Volume 1 Issue 1

G20 Leadership in Combating Climate Change: Challenges, Progress, and the Road Ahead

11:00 pm
Locked Out and Left Behind: Examining Marginalization in Lucknow image 2
30 min read
  • Women's right

Locked Out and Left Behind: Examining Marginalization in Lucknow

8:09 am
Environmental Crimes and Legal Provisions image 27
15 min read
  • Journal of Legal Research and Analysis
  • Research Paper
  • Volume 2 Issue 1

Environmental Crimes and Legal Provisions

2:16 am
Cybercrime in Cross-Border Jurisdictions: Challenges and Solutions CYBER CRIME
10 min read
  • Journal of Legal Research and Analysis
  • Research Paper
  • Volume 1 Issue 1

Cybercrime in Cross-Border Jurisdictions: Challenges and Solutions

2:08 am

CONTACT DETAILS

JOURNAL OF LEGAL RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS

Publisher Details:


Publishing Body: JHA PRANAV KUMAR
Owner's Name: JHA PRANAV KUMAR
Address: NEAR SDO KOTHI, SAKARUGARH, SAHIBGANJ,
JHARKHAND, 816109.
Mail: jhapranav2020@gmail.com / info.lralegal@gmail.com

  • ABOUT US
  • ADVISORY BOARD
  • EDITORIAL BOARD
  • JOURNAL of LEGAL RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS
  • Submission Guidelines
  • Campus Ambassadors
  • UGC NET (LAW) COACHING & GUIDANCE
  • OUR CERTIFICATE COURSES
  • CONTACT US
  • TERMS AND CONDITIONS
LRA LEGAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED. ( CIN -U85499UP2024PTC207221). Registered as a Startup under Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DIPPT), Government of India . Copyright © All rights reserved. | MoreNews by AF themes.

Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy