CASE MANAGEMENT - A MODERN CONCEPT

By
Niranjan J. Bhatt, Advocate.

CASE MANAGEMENT is a judicial process which provides

effective, efficient and purposeful judicial management of a case so as to

achieve a timely and qualitative resolution of a dispute. It assists in the

early identification of disputed issues of fact and law, the establishment

of a procedural calendar for the life of the case and the exploration of a

possibility of resolution of the dispute through methods other than the

Court trial.

CASE MANAGEMENT requires early assignment of a case to a

judge who then exercises judicial control over the case immediately after

it is filed and keeps track of the record at every stage. The Judge applies

judicial process to the rival contentions at the earliest stage after filing of

the written statement and requires and enforces active participation and

joint communication amongst the parties and their lawyers for the smooth

progress of the case. Case management technique mobilizes early

preparation of respective cases by the parties and their lawyers by

requiring them to identify the real controversies in the case and seeking
early response from the other sides on the questions of facts and law

raised by the opponents; this is done effectively utilizing procedures laid

down by Civil Procedure Code. It requires submission of separate case

management statements by each party and enforces the other side to

answer any of the requisitions, if any made by each party and, in addition,

provides sanctions for non-compliance.

At the time of hearing of the case management statements by the

parties, the Judge evolves a joint case management statement by all the

parties recording therein, inter alia, the admitted and disputed facts.

Minimizing or narrowing down the controversies, and explore the

possibility of early resolution of disputes by judicial

settlement/conciliation/arbitration/mediation/early neutral evaluation. The

Judge then delivers early judgment on agreed, admitted or uncontested

questions wherever possible, thereby greatly reducing the case load.

If the case remains undecided after the above stated efforts fail, the

judge fixes the schedule for the trial of the case and directs the parties to

follow and adhere to the said schedule so that he may run and finalize the

trial expeditiously.
 Delay defeats equity and many times delay amounts to denial of

justice. Law’s delays create tremendous backlog which, in turn, creates

confusion and chaotic conditions in the administration of justice and

results in the loss of public confidence in the judicial system. The causes

for delay are attributable to explosion of litigation, fewer judges and

lack of awareness to tackle the problem of delay. A laissez fair approach

in the handling of case load results in the piling 9 up of cases. Lack of

will and joint co-operation of legal actors the judges and the lawyers –

and total non involvement of litigants have left the “unattended child to

its fate”. The problems have multiplied due to lethargy and passive

handling of the administrative aspects of the case thereby creating an

absence of answerability. Without dynamic control and continuous

monitoring of the system, a passive indifference and despair creating a

helpless acceptance of the existing situation prevail, resulting in

multiplication of back logs. It is therefore necessary to create an

awareness that the justice system is an integral part of the national

system and can contribute effectively to nation-building by a motivated

modern approach with modern mechanisms and joint involvement of

judges, lawyers, administrative officers and the litigants. Creating an

awareness, introducing the concept of answerability exhibiting a

conscious effort and determination, introducing a modern management

concept and proven modern mechanisms to increase communication will

upon all concerned that a well managed justice system can contribute

effectively towards the growth of commerce, industry, social values and

awareness for law and order in the society, thereby reviving people’s

faith in a judicial system which people have recently started to view as a

savior of democratic process.

Thus, CASE MANAGEMENT will provide the immediate need

for preventing futile backlogs, providing swift justice, dealing with

backlogs with a more determined effort and creating an atmosphere of

joint venture between judges, lawyers, litigants and administrative

officers. Identification of the problem area will create the need for their

solution and continuous steering of the life of a case will result in due

attention to the complicated aspects of the litigation process. Faster

turnover of cases will create respect and confidence for the system and a

new attitude amongst legal actors will build up the institution of justice

with a sense of purpose and meaning.

ROLE OF A JUDGE IN CASE MANAGEMENT

1. No sooner the case is filed in the Court, it is assigned to a Judge

who assumes immediate control over the case and becomes an

Officers involved with the case.

2. The Judge keeps track of the case by adhering to the schedules

and sees that there is due service of process to the defendants

and that the written statements are filed by the defendants. No

unreasonable time should be allowed to be wasted for service

of the process and filing of the written statements.

3. The Judge ensures that the procedures for case management and

ADRs are properly explained by the Advocates to their clients

and due certification about the same is given by the Advocates.

He also receives verification from the parties that they have

understood the said procedures properly. In addition, he verifies

that the printed materials explaining the case management and

ADR have been delivered to the plaintiff at the time of the filing

of the suit and to the defendant at the time of service of the

process.

4. The Court can ask the bailiffs / serving Officers whether the

process is served or why it is not served. Such serving Officers

will be answerable to the Court for non service without

legitimate reasons.
5. After the pleadings are filed, the Judge will study them to

understand the real controversy in order to control the hearing at

all stages more effectively.

6. The Judge would ensure that the plaintiff and his Advocate file

the case management statement within two months from the

filing of the written statement. This will be after copies are

served to the defendants and their Advocates. After the two

months period, the Judges shall continue to direct the plaintiff’s

Advocate by special or general notice to prepare and file the

case management statement within the time schedule. No

extension for filing the case management statement shall be

given except in special circumstances for reasons to be noted,

briefly, in writing. Adjournments should not be granted as a

matter of course. The Judge shall grant no more than one

extension to the plaintiff and in no event shall such time extend

beyond 30 days from the period specified.

7. The Judge shall ensure the case management statement is filed

by the defendants and their Advocates, within 15 days from the

filing of the case management statement by the plaintiff, after

serving copies to other parties. No extension for filing case

management statements by the defendants shall be given except

in special circumstances for reasons to be recorded, briefly, in

course. The Judge shall not grant more than one extension to the

defendant/s and in no even shall such time extend beyond 30

days from the period specified. In the event of such an extension

given to either of the parties, the Judge shall the costs (not to

exceed………rupees). Orders imposing sanctions shall not be

subject to appeal or revision and no adjournments or stay of such

orders will be granted.

8. The Judge shall then study the respective case management

statements and, between the period of 15 and 30 days after the

filing of case management statements by the defendants, shall

set the date for the case management hearing. At such hearing,

he will give sufficient hearing and prevail upon the parties to

properly and effectively comply with the requisitions made by

the other parties. The approach of the Judge to the requisition

and their compliance will both be casual, rather it will be

effective and purposeful.

9. While ensuring compliance to the time schedule and to the

requisitions, the Judge shall exercise judicial authority clearly,

expeditiously and purposefully and impose sanctions to secure

compliance and not to penalize. He will also use his judicial

achieve results speedily and effectively.

10. While seeking compliance voluntarily or by agreement, the

Judge shall not hesitate to pass necessary orders when required.

The Judge shall keep in mind the provisions of 0 9A(proposed)

0.10 to 0.16 and pass such orders, as the facts and circumstances

demand, to include making orders or passing judgment under

O.XII R 6 wherever possible.

At the time of the case management hearing, the Judge shall

scrutinize and verify the respective case management

statements of the parties and carefully check and the

requirements of the prescribed formats are applied.

11. In case the Judge does not see fit to make order or pass

judgment under O XII R 6 at the time of the case management

hearing, he shall , within two months of the said hearing, fix a

date for a joint case management hearing directing the parties to

file a joint case management statement (in preparation for the

hearing) within 30 days. The Judge shall ensure that the parties

or their Advocates have selected one of the alternative dispute

resolution mechanisms available to the parties. The Judge

will explain to the parties, if necessary, the advantages of

selecting the said mechanism and will further inform them that
 failure to reach a result by a particular mechanism will enable

the party to select another. Failure in bringing a result by any of

the mechanisms, will however, not forfeit the right of the parties

to go to the trial. Any misapprehensions of the parties about the

said mechanisms must be removed by the Judge. He will

explain to the parties the importance of a joint case

management conference between the parties and their

Advocates and then jointly prepare statements of admitted facts

and issues arising for determination including any preliminary

issues. The respective parties and their Advocates will include,

in the statement and for the Court’s consideration, any issues

on which there is no agreement. The Judge will also stress the

deadlines for trial of the case. The Judge will finally ensure that

the parties and their Advocates write down their names and

telephone numbers and sign the joint case management

statement.

ADR – Alternate Dispute Resolution is also known as

CDR – Consensual Dispute Resolution

For Case Management Statements please see pages 41 to 43