On the basis of my own experiences through several Civil Litigation,
I understood that biggest hurdle in getting justice in time is the large number of provisions provided by the Civil Procedure
Code. Therefore, in 1983 I invented, innovated and evolved a Model Draft of New Civil Procedure Code, and in 1985 forwarded
it to the then Law Minister Shri Asok Sen, then in 1995 I referred it in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 151 of 1996 filed before
Supreme Court. I fully am confident that if the aforesaid Model Draft could have been adopted it could have made easily justice
delivery system in civil disputes much expeditious without much new infrastructure
or Judicial Workforce and could have also help to remove backlog of the Large Number of Court cases. This Model Draft
could make possible to adjudicate even any type of critical civil dispute within two years from the date of filing. However,
this Model is competent to open the much better scope for growth and promotion of large number of new Advocates to involve
directly in the judicial delivery System. But, ignoring objective of the complete Model Draft of New Civil Procedure Code,
a Part of it were adopted when recent Amendments were made in Civil Procedure Code. However, I am reproducing the aforesaid
Model Draft of New Civil Procedure Code from aforesaid Writ Petition, for kind considerations of the citizen, litigants and
more particularly Advocates and legal luminaries. Read complete Model Draft of New Civil Procedure Code……
CHAPTER – IV
DRAFT FOR MODEL OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE
In view of the considerations, that Justice
means Justice in time, the Petitioner had prepared a model of Civil Procedure Code to suggest the replacement against the
existing Civil Procedure Code. All concerned may agree with that "Justice delayed Justice denied" in real sense due to long-long-time-taking
procedures adopted under the said code for Civil litigations. Such serious situation is responsible for increase of crimes
related to such civil litigations.
In the year of 1983-84, the Petitioner had made
an indepth study of Civil Procedure Code and its 51 Orders, 703 Rules, and thousands Sub-Rules, besides 151 Sections and several
hundred sub-sections and found that the object behind these provisions were to ensure free and fair justice. Butter mixed
with honey will be poisonous. Likewise, good Civil Procedure Coder prepared in the line of law in United Kingdom, in India,
became instrumental to misuse the Administration of Justice to harass and blackmail the opponents. Some people files litigations
thinking that they can obstruct the object of opponent for several years. A democracy cannot survive for a long time unless
Justice is protected and ensured. Having this concept in mind, the petitioner had written about the said Model of Civil Procedure
Code to the then Law and Justice Minister Shri Asok Sen by letter dated 15th March, 1985 by Regd. Post. In view
of Reforms, Globalisation and open Market Economy, the said Model Code has now became more important and the petitioner have
understood that their Lordships are eager to evolve a Judicial system under Free, Fair and Fast adjudication of the litigations
can be possible. The main reasons for delay in litigations are unwarranted adjournments of trials on various grounds, interlocutory
proceedings, which is removed in his model, from the business of trial courts and Advocates have given much more responsibilities,
in depth involvement in Administration of Justice and made accountable to their clients.
Model Code was prepared to ensure the Free,
Fair and Fast Justice within time bound program described as under:-
Service of summons 40 Days
Collection of documents by the Advocates of
defendants 60 Days
Filling of the Defence 60 Days
Interrogations and answers from both side parties
Recording of evidence 90 Days
Finding of Facts 90 Days
Judgments 60 Days
Maximum adjournments permissible 60
Execution of Judgments (If Appeal not filed)
180 Days Total 700 Days
Under this model code, adjudication of litigation,
is divided in to four parts. Up to the interrogatories and answers, the record of the suit will kept with the court of the
Registrar at a Sub-division level, who will also maintain Registers for the following business:-
- Registration of all litigations in one Register irrespective
of any Police Stations under the Sub-division.
- Publication of a List of the Penal of Advocates; (the entire
list of Members of a Bar Association of a Sub-Division will constitute such list on seniority basis.
- Filing of the evidences recorded by the Penal Advocates of
the litigation who will be appointed on rotation basis.
- Allotment of litigations for the courts of Munsif on rotation
basis to record findings of facts.
- After return of the file of litigation from the concerned
court of Munsif, allotment of litigation to a court of Asst. Dist. Judge to pronounce its Judgment.
Now the Petitioner would lie to present a brief
note on the orders of Model suggested Code which will ensure the Justice within prescribed period irrespective of all consideration.
MODEL OF ALTERNATIVE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE
ORDER-I: Parties to the Suit (against the existing
Order I and part of Order XXII) : All interested parties have right to file, participate or defend any suit subject to bear
full actual cost including damage due to suit, if failed to establish his / their claim or defence.
ORDER- II: Suits (against existing orders II,
IV, VII, XI, XIV): a plaintiff shall file the plaint in prescribed form alongwith duplicate copies of all documents in his
possession and on which he relies to file the suit; list of documents which would not be in his possession but at the same
time, he relies his claim giving the name and address of possessors of such documents, if plaintiff knows; suggested issues;
list of witness all pleadings with full facts and full court fees before the Registrar of Trial Courts at a sub-division (There
will be no provisions for amendment of plaint or pleadings)
ORDER-III: Recognised agents and pleaders (against
existing Order III) : The Advocate of the plaintiff would be accountable to serve the summons and Advocate of the Defendants
would be accountable to receive the (copy of the) plaint and other documents from the Court of Registrar. Such Advocates would
work in real sense as court officers as well as agents of their clients.
- The Advocate being the agent of the plaintiff as the Court
Officer in concerned litigation would serve the summon within 30 days from the date of filing of litigation through his own
men as well as by Regd. Post. If in both manner, the service of summon is not possible, he willpublish notice in two local
newspapers of sub-division stating suit No. name of the Court of Registrar, name and address of the plaintiff and defendants
and himself, without referring the cause of the suit. The date of publication of such notice should be treated as service
- Copies of the plaint and all other documents would not required
to send along with the summon, but shall be deposited with Registrar, from whom, the Advocate being the agent(s) of defendant(s)
would collect such copies within 7 days from the date of service of summons.
- The Advocate of the plaintiff would be empowered to sign
the summons in the capacity of court officer in the concerned litigation.
ORDER-V: DEFENCE (against existing Orders VIII,
VVV-A, IX, XII and XXIII):
The Written Statement under existing code would
be replaced by the word defence. The opposite parties shall file their defence within 60 days from the date of service of
summons in the same manner of the plaint, alongwith Xerox copies of all documentary evidence in his defence, if any, have
in his possession, list of any documents if not in his possession with name and address of possessors of the same, if he knows,
list of witnesses in support of his defence, and list of additional issues, if any.
ORDER-VI Documents (Against Existing Order XIII):
The discovery of documents would be submitted
alongwith the plaint. Under the model Code, the possessor of any documents relating to any litigation automatically become
the Receiver of the particular documents in his possession for time being, till disposal of the concerned litigation and should
supply True Photocopies of such documents on payment of cost within 7 days from the date of notice from the Advocate of either
side in the said litigation.
ORDER-VII: Adjournment: (Against existing Order
Adjournment for total period of 60 days between
the filing of the litigation and Judgment can be granted by the District Judge only.
ORDER-VIII: Interlocutory Orders:
Interlocutory orders like temporary injunction
can be granted by the Appellate Court only, which will not effect the adjudication of the main suit at trial courts.
ORDER-IX: Affidavit, the provision will remain
as existing, under order IX.
- Under the proposed code, interrogatories will become a necessary
part of the proceedings of the suit, which also will help judiciary to give findings and judgments on the more stronger basis.
- After filing defence by the defendants, in a suit, both the
parties will, if any, make a questionnaires in a prescribed form within a limited period, upon opponent parties who in his
turn shall bound to make answers within prescribed times in prescribed form, otherwise shall be debarred from contesting the
Instead of present jurisdiction of trial courts
based on Police Station, all Civil Suits within all Police Stations under a particular Sub-Division shall be comprised as
one Jurisdiction to be vested in the Court of Registrar of such Sub-Division.
ORDER-XII: Recording of Evidences:
- A Court Officer would be appointed for this purpose from
penal of Advocates amongst all members of local Bar of a Sub-Division which shall be declared on the first day of each year,
without delisting anyone, but on the basis of seniority.
- Recording of the evidences of the witnesses would be duty
of this penal;
- This will be the duty of the plaintiff/defendant to produce
his witnesses: before the Court Officer within prescribed time to record evidence in presence of the both side Advocates and
parties and within the area of court compound;
- Evidences given by the witnesses would be recorded by the
Advocates from the said penal on the rotation basis, and in presence of parties and Advocates of both side parties, and signatures
of the witnesses, Advocates, of both side parties as well as parties would be taken over in the prescribed form on which evidence
would be recorded.
- Evidences would be recorded in triplicate with the help of
carbon paper and one copy each would be served to the first Plaintiff and defendant respectively just at the moment of recording
of evidence and original would be submitted before the Registrar of the Trial Courts. Xerox Copies of recorded evidence shall
be supplied to other plaintiffs or defendants, if any, after certifying as true copy by the Penal Advocate / Court Officers.
On the basis of allegations, claims made by
the plaintiffs the defence filed by the defendants, answer made by both side parties against interrogatories submitted by
either party and evidence recorded by the Advocate Penal, the Court of Munsif will make its findings of facts on the prescribed
ORDER-XIV: Judgment and Execution of Decree:
On the basis of findings made by the Court of
Munsif, the Judgment of the suit after hearing both parties, would be given by a Sub-Judge, who will be assigned the Suit
on rotation basis, considering all facts relates to merit of the case and legal side of the suit. If decree is passed, a copy
of finding as well as Judgment would be served upon defendant’s Advocate fixing the date of execution of decree. No
separate case will be required to be filed for execution of decree under proposed code, but this will be duty of the court
to execute the order of decree, if not appealed.
If plaintiff succeeds in establishing his case
on the basis of merit, he will be entitled to get entire actual cost of the suit and damage caused thereof incurred y him.
On the other hand, if he fails in establishing his claim on the basis of merit, he would be compelled to pay all actual expenses
and damages incurred y the defendants. If any case lost by either party for the technical or any ground of law, no order would
be passed as to the cost.
She against he in case of female.
Enter supporting content here