In a special address, Justice MS Sonak of the Bombay High Court pointed out that in India, the judge-to-population ratio remains poor and that archaic processes still cause enormous delays in litigation. Such delays are often taken advantage of by dishonest litigants, he observed.
“The contracting parties are often fully aware of their breaches, their weaknesses, but would resist enforcement simply because it is commercially profitable to do so. The delays, the vagaries of litigation encourage unethical practices and also incentivise taking of chances. This attitude and culture has to change…The lack of a credible, legal alternative to enforce contracts swiftly and without hassle emboldens the parties to breach contracts,” he explained.
To combat this, the High Court judge opined that it is crucial to not only develop an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) culture in India, but also actively tackle frivolous litigation.
“We must develop an ADR culture in India…Simultaneous with developing ADR culture, we must disincentivise the resort to frivolous litigation aimed only at exploiting our unfortunately tardy legal process.”
The judge also noted that the government is one of the biggest litigators and often ends up shelling out a lot of taxpayer money in the process.
“Here again, the culture is to assume no responsibility whatsoever. This is sometimes for downright dishonest reasons and sometimes because the officers or bureaucrats do not want to be accused of dishonestly.”
He went on to opine that public sector undertakings must, therefore, be sensitised about the virtues of ADR.
As he concluded his address, he called upon law schools to focus on legal training to prevent disputes from spiraling into emotional diatribes. Law schools should build skills to negotiate, mediate and settle disputes, if not prevent them, he said.
Source: Barandbench
