 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
 |
 |
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
 |
 |
|
||||||||||
 |
|
|||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Report No. 99 3.3. Views on Question 22.- In this sense, Question 22 is connected with Question 21, and goes with it. The important points of view expressed in the replies to Question 21 have been already summarised by us while dealing with that Question1-a fact which constitutes the background against which we shall now proceed to deal with the views expressed on Q. 22. At the, outset, it may be mentioned that the United Lawyers Association, New Delhi2 has stated in its reply that the Supreme Court Rules already contain provisions for filing written briefs in writ petitions and for filing statements of case in civil appends, but "those provisions are not taken seriously either by the bar or by the bench", according to the United Lawyers Association and statements of case are dispensed "with in almost all cases". On the bare Question whether the filing of written briefs will cut down the time taken in oral argument, there is-rather unexpectedly-serious disagreement. While some replies forwarded on the Questionnaire agree that it would be so, a large number of replies either emphatically assert that written briefs would not cut down the time taken in oral arguments, or implicitly suggest that is their opinion, in view of certain pre-requisites which (according to them) are not satisfied. 1. Chapter 2, supra. 2. Law Commission Collection No. 23/18, Law Commission's File, S. No. 137.    |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
 |
|
|||||||||||
 |
|
 |
|
|||||||||
Back