The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday urged a junior lawyer to argue a case himself, instead of seeking an adjournment by citing the unavailability of his senior [Becharbhai Dhanrajbhai Anjana & Ors. v State of Gujarat & Ors.]..Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal observed that such opportunities to argue cases should be seized by junior lawyers. "I think you should take this opportunity to argue the matter. You can easily tell your Senior that the 'Court was not listening to me, I had to argue, I had no option.' This is how young lawyers get opportunity to argue in the Court, and very easily you can tell your senior that 'I made a lot of effort but the court did not listen to me, I was forced to argue.' Argue it, if you find any difficulty we will adjourn," she said, while addressing the lawyer present.The Chief Justice was sitting with Justice Pranav Trivedi when the courtroom exchange took place. .Advocate Abhijeet Rathod had appeared before the Bench on behalf of his senior, advocate Mehul H Rathod, to request that the case hearing be deferred.The Court, however, was initially not inclined to adjourn the case."You have to cooperate, this is not acceptable, that counsels cannot refuse to argue the matter. It is pending from 2013, the writ petition is from 2001, so if you consider the age of litigation, it is more than 23 years old", Chief Justice Agarwal remarked.Advocate Abhijeet Rathod suggested that he would argue the case himself the next day, if the arguing counsel, advocate Nayak, is not available.The Court eventually accepted this adjournment request and listed the matter for hearing on Wednesday afternoon. Chief Justice Agarwal also made it clear that the junior lawyer should argue the matter when it is heard on Wednesday. .Later in the day, the arguing counsel appeared before the Court to seek a longer adjournment, suggesting that the matter may be heard next week.The Court, however, rejected this request, while reiterating that arguments in the matter would have to be led by advocate Abhijit Rathod on Wednesday."He (Rathod) will argue. You assist him, be by his side and let him argue," Chief Justice Agarwal told the arguing counsel."He (junior counsel) will take longer time that's the issue. If I am prepared, my lord, I will finish it quickly," advocate Nayak explained."He may take longer time but then he will get an opportunity to argue," the Chief Justice replied. "This is a serious matter, that’s why my lord," advocate Nayak added."Then, it is all the more necessary - for junior counsel to deal with the serious matters. When will he grow?" Chief Justice Agarwal remarked. "In some matters he appears and I assist him, it is not like he is not getting opportunity," advocate Nayak said. "So in this matter also you assist him, and If you find any difficulty then you can rise and argue, let him start," the Chief Justice insisted. The matter is slated to be heard again today at 2.30 PM.
The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday urged a junior lawyer to argue a case himself, instead of seeking an adjournment by citing the unavailability of his senior [Becharbhai Dhanrajbhai Anjana & Ors. v State of Gujarat & Ors.]..Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal observed that such opportunities to argue cases should be seized by junior lawyers. "I think you should take this opportunity to argue the matter. You can easily tell your Senior that the 'Court was not listening to me, I had to argue, I had no option.' This is how young lawyers get opportunity to argue in the Court, and very easily you can tell your senior that 'I made a lot of effort but the court did not listen to me, I was forced to argue.' Argue it, if you find any difficulty we will adjourn," she said, while addressing the lawyer present.The Chief Justice was sitting with Justice Pranav Trivedi when the courtroom exchange took place. .Advocate Abhijeet Rathod had appeared before the Bench on behalf of his senior, advocate Mehul H Rathod, to request that the case hearing be deferred.The Court, however, was initially not inclined to adjourn the case."You have to cooperate, this is not acceptable, that counsels cannot refuse to argue the matter. It is pending from 2013, the writ petition is from 2001, so if you consider the age of litigation, it is more than 23 years old", Chief Justice Agarwal remarked.Advocate Abhijeet Rathod suggested that he would argue the case himself the next day, if the arguing counsel, advocate Nayak, is not available.The Court eventually accepted this adjournment request and listed the matter for hearing on Wednesday afternoon. Chief Justice Agarwal also made it clear that the junior lawyer should argue the matter when it is heard on Wednesday. .Later in the day, the arguing counsel appeared before the Court to seek a longer adjournment, suggesting that the matter may be heard next week.The Court, however, rejected this request, while reiterating that arguments in the matter would have to be led by advocate Abhijit Rathod on Wednesday."He (Rathod) will argue. You assist him, be by his side and let him argue," Chief Justice Agarwal told the arguing counsel."He (junior counsel) will take longer time that's the issue. If I am prepared, my lord, I will finish it quickly," advocate Nayak explained."He may take longer time but then he will get an opportunity to argue," the Chief Justice replied. "This is a serious matter, that’s why my lord," advocate Nayak added."Then, it is all the more necessary - for junior counsel to deal with the serious matters. When will he grow?" Chief Justice Agarwal remarked. "In some matters he appears and I assist him, it is not like he is not getting opportunity," advocate Nayak said. "So in this matter also you assist him, and If you find any difficulty then you can rise and argue, let him start," the Chief Justice insisted. The matter is slated to be heard again today at 2.30 PM.