Part-heard matters in Madras HC to be placed before new Bench upon change of roster: [Read Notification]

Chief Justice of the Madras High Court Indira Banerjee has issued a notification stating that upon a change of roster, part-heard matters shall be released and placed before the appropriate Bench as per the roster..However, upon request by a litigant, the matter may be retained by the Bench which partly heard the matter, after such request is endorsed by the Chief Justice..Parties may make such a request if the matter has been heard for a considerable length of time so that a de novo hearing would not be expedient..The notification dated March 8, 2018 states:.“Upon change of roster, Part-heard matters shall stand released and be placed before the Bench as per Roster..However, if the parties or any of them make a request for retention of the matter before the Hon’ble Bench which had heard it, stating that the matter had been heard for a considerable length of time and de novo hearing would not be expedient, and if the Hon’ble Bench endorses the request, such matter may be placed before the Hon’ble the Chief Justice for being assigned to the Hon’ble Bench which partly heard the Matter.”.This measure may serve the interests of speedy justice in either scenario. Following a change of roster, cases may remain stuck with a judge who would be tasked with hearing more cases. This issue is effectively resolved by the new notification..On the other hand, the notification also addresses any practical difficulties likely to ensue if a particular case is transferred to a new bench..As Senior Advocate P Wilson points out,.“It is not sufficient for a judge, within three months, to hear and decide all the matters. There will be many cases he will be in the midst of hearing. But because of the change of roster, he will have the additional burden of hearing those cases also..…If the two counsels feel that the matter has been elaborately heard on both sides, then the Chief Justice has rightfully given them provision to go before the same judge.”.Advocate M Radhakrishnan concurs in welcoming the notification, particularly since the option lies with litigants to request retention of the case before the same judge..“As per this order, the request for retention of a part-heard-matter with the concerned judge despite change of roster should come from the advocates. If there is no request from the Bar, the concerned judges have no authority to keep the part-heard matters with them. This notification would certainly be in the larger interest of justice.”.In similar interest, Radhakrishnan hopes that measures are also implemented to ensure that cases are expeditiously posted before the appropriate bench, following judge recusals..“It is time the Chief Justice considered another aspect of the roster. When a roster judge or judges are not inclined to hear a case, the Chief Justice should post such cases before the concerned judges within a period of one week from the date the roster Bench declines to hear the cases.”.Read Notification: