Back
D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J. B. PARDIWALA
M. P. High Court Bar Association – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI.
1. Thirty-nine Debt Recovery Tribunals1[“DRTs”] and five Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunals2[“DRATs”] have been constituted under the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 19933[ “1993 Act”].
2. The Department of Financial Services in the Union Ministry of Finance issued a notification on 23 January 2020 by which the Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRTs) and Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunals (DRATs) Electronic Filing Rules 20204[“2020 Rules”] were notified. Originally, the e-filing of pleadings and applications was made optional. On 22 July 2021, a notification was issued by which the e-filing of cases involving a value of Rs 100 crores and above was made mandatory. At a conference of the Chairpersons of DRATs and the Presiding Officers of DRTs on 9 June 2022, it was recommended that e-filing should be made mandatory, irrespective of the amount involved in the proceedings.
3. On 31 January 2023, a notification was issued by the Union government in exercise of powers under Section 36 of the 1993 Act for amending the Electronic Filing Rules so as to make e-filing of pleadings by applicants mandatory. Any other form of filing, it is provided, shall not be
The main legal point established in the judgment is that while e-filing provides transparency and efficiency in the administration of justice, the digital divide in the country must be addressed to e....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of 100% e-filing compliance in specified timelines, the need for amendments to incorporate e-filing requirements, and the disconti....
The court emphasized the necessity for accountability and efficiency in the e-filing system for charge sheets, directing both police and courts to address discrepancies and enhance operations.
Access to justice is a fundamental right; the existing statutory remedy under the SARFAESI Act is deemed ineffective for residents of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh due to significant accessibility hur....
The court established that the implementation of an e-filing system is crucial for the efficiency of consumer dispute resolution processes, and that litigants should not be required to submit physica....
The use of technology by the Bar and the Bench is no longer an option but a necessity, and access to courts must not be restricted based on technology usage.
Neither Section 19(10A), nor Section 19(10B) make any reference to, nor make it incumbent for the Applicant to file original documents at the time of presenting the Original Application.
The court established that the power of the Tribunal to grant ex-parte interim orders inheres in it, and any guidelines imposing restrictions on this power are invalid.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
