The Chennai Bench of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has said that a lawyer’s seniority or fee does not entitle them to take up more than a fair share of court time, and that it may fix outer limits for arguments if the practice continues.

The Bench of Justice N. Seshasayee (Judicial Member) and Jatindranath Swain (Technical Member) said long submissions were pushing back the cause list, delaying other litigants and forcing judges to sit on Saturdays. It also remarked that matters listed early in the day were sometimes not taken up until noon.

The Bench said that when several days are set aside for a case, they are not all meant for one side. It urged counsel, including those appearing from Delhi, to plan their arguments within the time available. It also said judges can ask for clarification where needed, so counsel should concentrate on their strongest points.

The remarks come as the Supreme Court has been pressing for speedier hearings. On October 27, in Sona Bansal v. Vashisht Kumar Goyal, a Bench of Justices J. B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran said the Court’s requests for early hearing must be treated as binding, and criticised the NCLAT’s Principal Bench in New Delhi for not hearing an appeal despite such a request. The Chennai Bench noted that it, too, has several such priority matters pending.

The Bench added that it did not wish to curtail the right to be heard, and that managing time was a shared responsibility of the Bench and the Bar.

Source: Bar & Bench. Report adapted from the original; please refer to Bar & Bench for the full story.