Supreme Court flags huge pendency of suits in Maharashtra courts; says trials cannot go smoothly if lawyers not fair

The Supreme Court on Thursday underscored that the high pendency of cases before courts cannot be resolved unless the lawyers also cooperate with the process and act in a fair manner. [Brihan Karan Sugar Syndicate Private Limited vs Yashwantrao Mohite Krushna Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana].A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Rajesh Bindal made the observation while dealing with a case in which a lawyer was noted to have made persistent objections during trial and consumed a lot of the trial court's time. .Considering that the case was from Maharashtra, the bench also pointed out that there is a huge pendency of suits before trial courts in the western State. ."If we peruse the data available on the National Judicial Data Grid, we find that there is a huge pendency of suits in the Trial Courts in the State of Maharashtra. If the members of the Bar do not cooperate with the Trial Courts, it will be very difficult for our Courts to deal with the huge arrears. While a trial is being conducted, the members of the Bar are expected to act as officers of the Court. They are expected to conduct themselves in a reasonable and fair manner," the bench observed..All the same, the Court objected to the conduct of the lawyer that represented the appellant-company before the trial court. "We cannot refrain from recording certain disturbing features about the conduct of a member of the Bar while the trial was being conducted in this case ... looking at the persistent objections raised by the learned advocate, the Court was required to record a substantial part of the cross-examination in question-and-answer form which consumed a lot of time of the Court," the Court stated. .The Supreme Court further highlighted that lawyers must remember that fairness is a hallmark of great advocacy."If the advocates start objecting to every question asked in the cross-examination, the trial cannot go on smoothly. The trial gets delayed," the bench remarked. .The Supreme Court made these observations while hearing an appeal in a copyright case. The parties involved were sellers of country liquor. While one party sold liquor under the name "Tango Punch", the other sold it under the name "Two Punch Premium.".The seller of Tango Punch moved the Supreme Court in appeal after the Bombay High Court stayed a trial court order in its favour. .The Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the appeal filed by the owner of Tango Punch (appellant). The top court found that the appellant had not established its goodwill by showing sales figures and expenses of promotion and advertisements of the product. "Therefore, we find that the High Court was justified in staying that particular part of the decree of the Trial Court by which injunction was granted for the action of passing-off," the Supreme Court said..The bench also noted that the appellant had unconditionally withdrawn its letters of objections to the defendant's (Two Punch Premium) alleged use of its copyright."This important factual aspect supports the order of stay granted by the High Court as regards the decree in respect of the infringement of copyright," the Supreme Court said. .The High Court's order cannot be faulted, the Supreme Court observed while dismissing the appeal..Advocates Rahul Chitnis, Dinesh Y Mali, Kamlesh Y Mali, Yogesh K Ahirrao, Chander Shekhar Ashri represented the appellant, Brihan Karan Sugar Syndicate Private Limited, before the Supreme Court.Advocates Suhaskumar Kadam and Prashant Kadam, briefed by Black & White Solicitors, appeared for the respondents, Yashwantrao Mohite Krushna Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana..[Read Judgment]