Monday, December 7, 2020

FARM BILL 2020 - UNDERSTANDING THE NEED

 

WHAT IS THE FARM BILL FUSS ALL ABOUT?

On 27th September, 2020 His Excellency the Hon’ble President of India gave his assent to the three ‘Agriculture Bills’ that were earlier passed by the Indian Parliament: 1> Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation Act), 2> Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act, 2020, and 3) Essential Commodities Amendment Act, 2020.  In short, FPTCPFA provides for intra and inter-state trade of farm produce beyond APMC; FEPAPA is about Contract Farming; and, the amendments to the ECA is for delisting some food items, during exigencies.  During the Corona pandemic period, the Govt of India came up with an Ordinance to make necessary amendments to the Essential commodities Act.  The name of the Ordinance ”The Famers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Ordinance, 2020”.  Two other legislation one by the name “the Farmers (Empowerment and Protection Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Ordinance, 2020” and another by the name the Essential Commodities (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020 was passed during the monsoon session of the Parliament.  Collectively the three of these called the Farm Bill 2020.

WHY WAS IT NECESSARY TO BRING AN AMENDMENT TO ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT AND THAT TOO BY WAY OF AN ORDINANCE?

Ordinances are bad.  Ordinance is detrimental to the legislative framework as it by passes the legislature.  A bill in order to become a law is introduces in the parliament (read Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha) and then it is scrutinised and discussed in the house.  Questions are answered and concerns are addressed.  Ordinances by-passes all these.  The Supreme Court in its various judgments has condemned and discouraged the practice of coming up with ordinances as it is more autocratic.

SO, WHY DID THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT HAS TO COME UP WITH AN ORDINANCE THAT TO AN IMPORTANT ONE RELATED TO AN ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT?

The answer is, because it was important.  At the time of passing of the ordinance the entire country was under self imposed lockdown.  The corona pandemic brought unprecedented challenges and it could not be expected that the people’s representatives could be complacent and attend a parliament session during such tough and challenging times.  Therefore, it was absolutely necessary to bring an ordinance.  The Ordinance was subsequently notified as Law.

WHY AN AMENDMENT TO THE ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT WAS REQUIRES?

The Essential Commodities Act is a colonial price of legislation which restricts the hoarding of goods for proper public distribution.  It is of no surprise that Cement used to be once under the purview of the Essential Commodities Act.  Contemporaneously, is it only stapled food, pulses, and cereals that still fall within the schedule of the Essential Commodities Act.  Everything else which once was the part of the list has gradually been de-listed.  During the lockdown period, the Government observed that there is scarcity of necessary goods in different pockets of the country because of the restrictions imposed by the Essential Commodities Act.  Bringing the transit network to a halt during lockdown, further added to the woos.  It was then realized that even readily available commodities were still languishing in the schedule of The Essential Commodities Act and therefore, its adequate supply and storage was not feasible uniformly across the Country.  It was in such scenario the Central Govt. was prudent enough to bring a determinant change to the colonial legislation and bring negative restrictions regarding the applicability of the Act.  Simply put, the Act was amended to an extent that allowed the storage of commodities except in the case of war, disaster and pandemic.  This is a welcome decision, not only momentarily but also as a long term impact.  It is a well known fact that unrestricted movements have always bettered the condition rather than control.

 

WHAT WAS THE NECESSITY TO INTRODUCE CONTRACT FARMING?

If Contract Farming is a problem, then how have farmers from Punjab and Haryana earning so much where contract farming is prevalent from the late 80s.

There is no law in India that prohibited contract farming before the impugned Act.  Contract farming was always there and was mostly unabated and unrestricted.  This Act simply puts a framework behind an already existing practise.  What the farmers were otherwise doing without any controlled mechanism is now part of the legislation for their betterment.  The Act by providing govt. Sanction to such contract has ensured no foul play against the destitute farmers.  Otherwise, the parties are free to enter into an agreement as there always were even before the impugned legislation came into effect.  It is beyond understanding how putting a regulatory framework upon all future contingent agreements in the nature of an improvement from the nonexistent regulatory regime may be subjected to condemnation.


WHAT IS MSP, APMC AND BAZAR SAMITY AND WHAT ARE THE FARMERS APPREHENSIVE ABOUT?

MSP is a Minimum per quintal Support Price that the Government guarantees to buy the agriculture produce at, twice a year during the Rabi and the Kharif season.  The new Act does not take away the MSP or the minimum guarantee.  It simply adds an additional option to produce to sell the agriculture produce outside the APMC and Bazaar Samity.  APMC and Bazar Samity are the purchase point where the agriculture produce is purchased from the farmers.  Only the 17% of the farmers go to APMC and Bazar Samity to sell their produce on MSP.  83% of the farmers any which way never go to the APMC and Bazar Samity and sell their produce directly in the market.  Therefore, a legislation that legitimises an existing practice already inherent in 83% of the farmers, by selling their produce outside APMC at a rate of their choice cannot be bad at law.  The Govt. has already reassured and reiterated that the MSP system is going to stay and any such apprehension is purely speculative.  Therefore, there is no fault in these legislation and the farmers should not be denied of an additional opportunities of sale.  It’s like you can sell from the local store and online, where it makes more monies.

But politics is all about issues and no political party can afford to be issueless.  Whose side the voters in general and the farmers in particular vote for is an outcome of the result in the assembly election.  But none of the political parties, at this point can lower their gun on hot political issue that directly touches the farmers.  Although, agriculture contributes 16% to the GDP, 63% of our population is directly impacted by any legislation around agriculture and agriculturist.  This is a big fat vote bank and political parties can hardly afford to let it go.

The opposition parties are not ever remotely bothered or connected with the destitute farmers.  Since independence, the income of the farmers has multiplied at around 16 times.  Whereas, just as a comparison, the salary of central govt. employees has multiplied by around 23 times.  The Modi Govt. is committed towards doubling the income of the farmers by 2022 and the farm bill 2020 is the most vital link to it.  It is an irony that those who couldn’t do anything remarkable for the agriculturists are cring foul when the MIDDLEMENS are turning irrelevant.


THEN WHY FARMERS FROM PUNJAB ARE PROTESTING?

Soybean farmers in Maharashtra have benefited to get more out of APMC deals. In the last three months, MahaFPC, the umbrella body of farmer producing companies (FPC) in Maharashtra, estimates that since the laws were enacted in September, FPCs in four districts have made worth Rs 10 crore from trade outside mandis.

Farmers shouldn’t be on roads and away from home when it’s chilling.  It is a fact and a matter of concern that Farmers from Punjab are protesting.  Framers from other states like UP and MP (Rank 1 and 2 in farm produce and way ahead of Punjab) are not protesting.  Farmers in Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu have welcomed the Farm Bill.  So, why are the farmers of Punjab who cough out a 2.5% commission for every transaction or 3,330 Crores per year just for Wheat and Paddy every year to Arthiya (also known as Ardhali = Middlemen) are protesting?

Some answers are better not spoken but needs to be figured out.

Monday, October 19, 2020

LAW/LEGAL – ASSOCIATES (THREE VACANCIES - 2021) at CHANAKYA LEGAL Jalpaiguri Circuit Bench

 

LAW/LEGAL – ASSOCIATES (THREE VACANCIES - 2021)


*WHO ARE WE?*


WE are Chanakya Legal and JALPAIGURI CIRCUIT BENCH is our home. This opportunity is based at Jalpaiguri Circuit Bench.

 

*WHAT HAVE WE DONE?*


When it boils down to dependable and dextrous legal solutions and litigation at the Jalpaiguri Circuit Bench of the Calcutta High Court or in North Bengal, Chanakya Legal has a reputation strenuously built. Based at the Circuit Bench of the Calcutta High Court at Jalpaiguri, Chanakya Legal is _THE_ fastest growing Lawyer/Legal/Law Firm.  We have more filings, disposals and wins to our kitty than anyone around here in North Bengal.

 

*WHAT'S IN IT FOR YOU?*


Here is an opportunity to learn from our high performing team. We seek some dynamic and AWESOME Law/Legal Associates as an integral member of our amazing team. This role is critical to the ongoing success of our brand and our Jalpaiguri Circuit Bench practice. The incumbent shall be majorily working on the civil side (Writ Petitions relating to Land Acquisition, Service Laws, Government Tenders and Contracts, Compensation, Claims and Damages)

As a Legal Associate, your role will be to help execute our Litigation and Legal strategy. Your day-to-day work will be high energy, client-focused and outcomes based. So if you drive your friends’ nuts with your fastidious attention to detail and outstanding legal skills… if you can convert statute concepts into solutions… if you have the flair for extensive reading…..then, Chanakya Legal could be your new family!

 

*WHEN AND HOW DOES IT STARTS?*


If you love the Law/Legal enough and want to learn the law/legal enough -  please contact us at ananya1806@gmail.com with an awesome cover letter. Don't call (we don't like such casual mode of communication all that much when it comes to shaping your career). CANVASSING IN ANY FORM IS THE SHORTEST AND FATEST WAY TO GET DISQUALIFIED. AWESOME PEOPLE WITH IMPECCABLE ENGLISH NEED ONLY CONTACT.

 

The training shall commence immediately and the selected ones shall join us by Jan 2021.

 

Commensurate STIPEND would be provided during Training Period.


Friday, August 21, 2020

Why Prashanth Bhushan’s conviction for contempt is both justiciable and justifiable.

 

An Anecdote

At the cost, consequence, and risk of being either a B for “Bhakt” or a C for “Chamcha”, because these are the only two categories of citizens living in the Country today. Or, being ostracized and kicked out of some ‘club of perception’ before being judged on personal and trivial preferences – like, having a JIO Sim or Airtel (Jio is B and everything else is C); prefer Ladoo or Barfi (Ladoo is Bhakt and Barfi is Chamcha, keep guessing, why?). Let me put this straight “I would rather like to be called a B than being a C or a BC)”. Everyone seems to be so much so on the verge of a huge divide and the fault finding mechanism that is so razor sharp that even a fair criticism of the opposition or the government will quickly rechristen you as B or C. When you choose cow urine you are B, choosing camel urine makes you C, and, if you say that urine does not make a good drink or you choose none, you are such a BC. So, in contemporary times, when B and C are the only options and remaining silent is also counted as sympathizer of either B or C, let’s try and explore this very important and relevant topic of the “Contempt of Court” in its true, neutral and third-party perspective. Yes, you can always label it the BC school of law and blame this article of being legally logical.

Being a student of law (a lawyer is a student of law, the moment the student dies, the lawyer dies!), I quickly learnt to look at things rationally. Between law and morality; god and evil; or, virility and sedately, there is always a scope for the Third Dimension. Let’s keep our Morality, perceptions, good, bad, and ugly in the parking lot for a little while and test the incidence and the irritant (yes, there is difference - an irritant is “a cause or potential cause of one or more incidents”), from a true state of neutrality. As a third party perspective where does the law of contempt finds a space. But, before we do that, I have a reminiscence of an interesting incident that I myself was witness to.

In the year 2005, being a fresh law graduate, I had little or no knowledge of practical application of law and the court's functionality. The law schools do not teach you that and things are more than meets the eye. I was more or less a trainee junior associate with a senior (we will not be taking names, except Prashanth Bhushan who is our Star Actor in this article. I or my Senior are no ways related to Mr. Bhushan 😁) practicing at the Supreme Court of India and the Delhi High Court. There was an infamous judge (Hon’ble Justice who retired long back) at the Delhi High Court who was highly short tempered and a know-it-all judge (remember the rules, we are not taking names, unless you have already made it 😊) . If that was not enough, he often used to humiliate the advocates for having little or no knowledge or on one or more trivial counts. There was an interesting courtroom exchange that I was witness to and is as follows, to the best of memory:-

 

Court : Mr. Senior Counsel, what is this revision application all about?

Senior : My client’s application was rejected by the lower court because it was filed after 60 days of the commencement of the trail.

Court : 60 days are you sure? When does a trial commences?

Senior : Yes My Lordship. Trial Commences after the framing of the Issues.

Court : No. Trial commences after the filing of the Written Statement. You are a senior and you should know this.

Senior : My Lordship, I still believe trial commences from the framing of the issues.

Court : The revision application is without merit and dismissed without any order as to the cost. Detail order to follow. CAV.

Senior : But My Lordship has hardly heard me out.

Court : If you do not know simple things you cannot be allowed to waste the time of the court.

Senior : How can you even pass such personal comments? You do not know simple things.

Court (furiously) : I will initiate a contempt proceedings against you for what you just said.

Senior : I am standing here for the next two hours and I want to see the contempt powers of this Court.

At this, the temperature of the courtroom was high and other members of the Bar immediately jumped to calm the situation. The judge, out of frustration, went for a small break and I with my Senior were out of the court premises for our chamber. After some passage of time, I asked my senior whether he had given it a thought what would on earth happen if the contempt was initiated against him. With calm he said “the contempt power is hardly a power and I am happy about recriminating.” Despite dictating the order of dismissal in the open court, the case was not dismissed and was simply released from the list of the Court to be placed before the other court. That was wise of even the Judge because the relief claimed was for condonation of delay (indirectly) and delay unless inordinate is usually condoned. Court looks into procedural aspects compassionately and the “commencement of trial” was an academic issue barely touching the issue at hand.

Now, there were academic and behavioral learning from this incident. Some quick and some after due deliberation. Three quick learning were - First, it takes two to Tango and it is always comity between the Bar and the Bench that works in the dispensation of justice. Second, vanity is concomitant of animosity, and Lastly, recrimination injures mutually. Three deep learning from the same incident that I learned in the last 15 years are at the end of this Article. Lest we dilate, let’s see what this contempt power is all about.

 

Law of the Land

The Framers of the Constitution were conscious of the fact that the Judiciary needs some weapon to protect itself from its own contempt. While deciding upon a dispute brought before it in law, or suo motu, judiciary has to deal with retrograde, recalcitrant, dilatory, refractory, discomfiting, maudlin, facetious, rile, and the bemused with pensively, conscientiously, sedately and sans bias. While doing so, the Judiciary directly exposes itself to contentious opinions with deep animosity that is detrimental and deign to its valor. Often such attacks are from the known quarters. The framers of the Constitution thus kept Article 129, 142(2) and 215 of the Constitution, that gives the power to the Court of Records (read Supreme Court and the High Courts) the power to punish for its own contempt. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, a small piece of legislation, was enacted in furtherance to the constitutional mandate to allow the judges to dispense justice sans fear, favour, affection or ill will. The freedom of Speech and Expression as enshrined in Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution is subject to reasonable exceptions enumerated in Article 19(2). In the fight between Freedom and Exception, Freedom shall and must win but not sans Exception. Freedom, is not Freedom to Interference; it is not Freedom to Scandalize; and, definitely not Freedom without consequences. With such intention the legislature divided Contempt as Civil and Criminal under the 1971 Act. Scandalising the Court is a Criminal Contempt under the 1971 Act alongside interference in the due course of a judicial proceeding or obstructing the administration of justice. The Supreme Court and the High Courts have the power to punish for contempt of court, either with simple imprisonment for a term up to six months or with fine up to Rs. 2,000 or with both.

 

The Incident

 

By judgment dated: 14.08.2020 pronounced by a Bench of 3 Judges of the Supreme Court, Mr. Prashanth Bhushan, has been found guilty of having committed criminal contempt of court and the case is adjourned to hear regarding his sentence. The basis for action for contempt are two tweets admittedly posted by the contemnor.  The first one reads as follows:

CJI rides a 50 lakh motorcycle belonging to a BJP leader at Rajbhavan, Nagpur without a mask or helmet at a time when he keeps the SC in lockdown mode denying citizens their fundamental right to access justice

The second tweet reads as follows:

When historians in future look back at the last six years to see how democracy has been destroyed in India even without a formal emergency they will particularly mark the role of the Supreme Court in this destruction and more particularly the role of the last 4 CJIs

Now, there has been a lot of hullabaloo regarding the judgment delivered, freedom of speech or expression, right to fair criticism, and suppression through hegemony.

On merits, however the judgment is correct. Contempt of Courts Act 1971, is a valid and constitutional piece of legislation. It is a settled proposition of law that the Supreme Court has power to take action suo motu and that, in such an event, consent of the Attorney General is not required.  The tweets are contemptuous and amount to Criminal Contempt on the face of it.  It is equally a settled principle of law that whether the context is contemptuous or not is for the court of record to decide. In the present context, to decide whether the remarks  amount to criminal contempt or not, one has to see the repercussion of such imputation in the minds of the plebian. [In the first tweet the allegation that CJI was riding the motor cycle is admittedly not true (underlining supplied) and hence the question of wearing a helmet does not arise.  Reference to the owner of the motorbike as a BJP leader and reference to the premises of Rajbhavan are also not without significance. Evidently, the contemnor intends to inject politics and hospitality into the episode. More than all these, as pointed out in the judgment, the averment that the “CJI has kept the Supreme Court in a lockdown mode, denying citizens of their Fundamental Right to access justice” is patently false.  The court has been functioning even during lockdown through video conference and the contemnor himself has approached the court both as a litigant and a lawyer and has obtained relief. The tweet read as a whole is calculated to create an impression that the Chief Justice of India has closed down the Supreme Court disowning his responsibility and is enjoying ride in a costly motorcycle sponsored by the Ruling Party. Undoubtedly this remark (which is prima facie false), is scandalous and calculated to undermine the dignity and authority of the court.  So far as the second tweet is concerned, not much argument is required to show that it amounts to gross criminal contempt.  The clear meaning of the imputation is that the Supreme Court in general and the four Chief Justices of India in particular, have been responsible for destroying democracy in this country during the last 6 years.  This is a clear case of condemnation of the Supreme Court and four Chief Justices, are responsible for destruction of democracy.  What will be the impression created in the mind of the public? – That an institution which has to protect democracy has destroyed it. Undoubtedly it lowers the dignity and authority of the Supreme Court and four Chief Justices, in the estimation of the public in general.  It is impossible to comprehend, that these assertions have been made bonafide and in public interest.]

[***colored portion is inspired from - Sri Prashanth Bhushan’s conviction for contempt – Justified, by B.V.Acharya, Senior Advocate and Former Advocate General, Karnataka for a detail discussion on the merit of the case.]

 

The Irritant

 

There is a far bigger and significant issue that we are facing today, and, that is what we begun this Article with. For, the tweets made by Mr. Bhushan; the judgment delivered against him; his refusal to apologize; and, the strong protest by a group of advocates, media and the members of Civil Society (who claims to be the conscience keeper of the democracy and independence) are all but incidents. The larger picture is something else. Those who are themselves the most Intolerant of the lot, will recriminate of intolerance, with a victim card in hand. Spit and Run is a fashionable trend. Spit on Face, Run again and play victim card in loop, is all so HOT and demanding. There is a conscience, consistent and incessant attempt to undermine all the institutions and pressurize them to act or at least take side against the Government. Criticizing all and every efforts of the government and its institution is the symbol of high-intellect. Keeping neutral is not an option and remaining silent is to support the establishment (remember B, C and BC). The same person can become relevant and irrelevant to the same set of B and C and the only thing that matters is which line a person is toeing. Let’s get back to where we started.  How may of us have observed that there is a rapid and spontaneous polarization happening and the most vociferous braggart is the leader. In all it’s anxiety, it is just that Mr. Bhushan’s vociferous opinion was appalling and crossed the line. The Supreme Court was also in no mood to show any mercy. It is the long-standing tradition of tolerance and comity that has built the Bar and the Bench and it is mutual. Mr Bhushan could have avoided this act of temerity and the Courts equally could have shoveled it below the red-carpet. But it seems, for once, the court thought the incident and the irritant both needs to be dealt with iron hands and punished as per law to maintain the Rule of Law and the Constitution it has to swear and abide by.

 

MAY it Please your Lordships

 

The punishment for the contempt of Court is rather symbolic (simple imprisonment for a term up to six months or with fine up to Rs. 2,000 or with both). Conditional Apology is also more of a Spit and Run to Spit again. I am sure and going by the nature of Mr. Bhushan,  he will choose to be behind bars rather than submit fine, even if  a minimum Fine is the only punishment given. Remember, Victim Card is very important if you want to sustain yourself in this murky game. 

Every member of the Bar and the bench have collective responsibility to maintain the comity. This has happened all along. As I mentioned in the anecdote above, even the worst of short-tempered ones are left with regret and bad taste in this fight. Nobody wants a pyrrhic victory at the cost of the institution. Avoidance is the best medicine and I am sure the punishment given in Mr. Bhushan's case will be mere symbolic.

With that hope, I would end with the three learning, that I have now made out from the golden words that my senior said 15 years ago : “the contempt power is hardly a power and I am happy about recriminating.

1)    The elephant is never won by anger; nor must that man who would reclaim a lion take him by the teeth. Therefore be courteous before the court and other lawyers. Never bad mouth about the judges.

2)    In the fight between Freedom and Exception, Freedom shall and must win but not sans Exception. Freedom is not freedom to interference; Freedom is not freedom to scandalize; and, Freedom is definitely not Freedom without consequences. Choose your Freedom wisely.

3)    Those who attack the judiciary must remember that they are attacking an institution which is quintessential when it comes to saving the aggressor himself.

 The Bottom Line is that the judgment is both just and justifiable, passed by a competent court in a constitutionally valid legislation and there is no concept to negative rights known to courts. 

Aur ha – ek Prashanth Bhushan ko contempt ki punishment milne se SAMBIDHAN KHATRE MEIN NAHI AAYEGA!

Sunday, August 16, 2020

Commercial Courts, what is the fuss all about?

 

[Author’s Note :: Complete credit for the answer to the above question and the first part thereof goes to the PRS Legislative Research, Ministry of Law and Justice for the article produced by them at the following link.  The rest of the portion is the result of the research work of the author.]

 

Enforcing commercial contracts requires the involvement of the judicial system.  However, it takes nearly four years (1,420 days) in India to resolve commercial disputes.  [See, “Ease of Doing Business”, 122nd Report of the Department Related Standing Committee on Commerce, December 21, 2015, http://164.100.47.5/newcommittee/reports/EnglishCommittees/Committee%20on%20Commerce/122.pdf.]  This may be due to reasons such as, high existing pendency of cases, and complex litigation procedures.  In 2013, there were 32,656 civil cases pending in various high courts, of which 52% were commercial disputes.  [See, “Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts and Commercial Courts Bill, 2015”, Law Commission,  Report No. 253, January 2015, http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report_No.253_Commercial_Division_and_Commercial_Appellate_Division_of_High_Courts_and__Commercial_Courts_Bill._2015.pdf.]

Over the years, various expert bodies such as the Law Commission of India and the Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice have observed the need to fast track disposal of commercial disputes.  [See, “Proposals for Constitution of Hi-Tech Fast – Track Commercial Divisions In High Courts”, Law Commission, Report No. 188, December 2003, http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/188th%20report.pdf.]  [See also, Report No.78, Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice: ‘The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Bill, 2015, Rajya Sabha, December 2015,  http://www.prsindia.org/uploads/media/Commercial%20courts/SCR-%20Commercial%20Courts%20bill.pdf.]  They note that most commercial disputes, especially of high value have an impact on financial investments and larger economic activity in the country.  In its 253rd Report, the Law Commission (2015) further noted that an independent mechanism for quick disposal of these commercial disputes is required with specialised expertise in dealing with commercial cases.

In this context, the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 was enacted to fast track the disposal of high value commercial disputes (above rupees one crore), by establishing commercial courts at the district level, and commercial divisions and commercial appellate divisions in high courts.  [The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015, https://indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/2156/1/201604.pdf.]

As of December 2017, state governments had constituted a total of 247 commercial courts in various districts across the country.  [Rajya Sabha Starred Question No.14, Ministry of Law and Justice, December 15, 2017.]  To improve ease of doing business in India, the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018 (Commercial Courts Ordinance, 2018) was promulgated in May 2018, to reduce the pecuniary jurisdiction of commercial courts and commercial divisions in high courts from one crore rupees to three lakh rupees.

 

Key Features

 

Table 1 compares provisions of the Commercial Courts (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018 with the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 (2015 Act).

 

 

Existing 2015 Act

The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018

Minimum value of commercial disputes

At least one crore rupees (amount to be notified by the central government).

At least three lakh rupees (amount to be notified by the central government).

Commercial division in high courts

Establishes commercial divisions in 5 high courts which have ordinary original civil  jurisdiction, i.e., the High Courts of Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta, Madras and Himachal Pradesh.

No change.

Commercial courts at district level

State governments may set up commercial courts at the district level, in areas where high courts do not have original jurisdiction.

Allows commercial courts at the district level to be set up, in areas where all 24 high courts have jurisdiction.
 

In areas where high courts have original jurisdiction, state governments may specify the pecuniary jurisdiction of commercial courts which is not lower than three lakh rupees and more than the pecuniary jurisdiction of district courts in those areas.
 

State governments may constitute commercial courts below the level of a district judge, in areas where high courts do not have original jurisdiction.

Commercial appellate division in all high courts

Establishes commercial appellate divisions in all 24 high courts to hear appeals against orders from: (i) commercial divisions of high courts, and (ii) commercial courts at the district level.

No change.

Commercial appellate courts at district level

No provision.

State governments may set up commercial appellate courts at the district level in areas where high courts do not have original jurisdiction.

These courts will hear appeals against orders of commercial courts below the level of a district judge.

Appointment of judges of commercial courts

State governments, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the High Court will appoint judges of commercial courts from the higher judicial service of the state.

State governments may with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the High Court, appoint judges of commercial courts either at the level of a district judge or below the level of a district judge.

Pre institution mediation

No provision.

Introduces mandatory mediation before the filing of a suit, in cases where no urgent relief is sought by the parties.
 

To be completed within three months (extendable by two months).

Counterclaims

If a counterclaim was filed in a commercial dispute of at least one crore rupees in a civil court, the civil court could transfer the suit to a commercial court or commercial division of high court.

Provision removed.

Table 1: Comparison of the 2015 Act with the Commercial Courts (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018

 

Note:  Original ordinary civil jurisdiction refers to when a court has the power to hear a fresh case.  In India, five High Courts (i.e., High Courts of Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta, Madras and Himachal Pradesh) have ordinary original civil jurisdiction.  The 19 remaining High Courts only have appellate jurisdiction, i.e., they can hear appeals from the others of subordinate courts.

Sources:  The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015, The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018; PRS.

PART B: KEY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS

Reduction in the pecuniary jurisdiction of commercial courts

 

The 2015 Act establishes commercial courts at the district level and commercial divisions in high courts to adjudicate commercial disputes with a value of at least one crore rupees.  The Ordinance reduces this limit to three lakh rupees  This raises a question whether lowering the pecuniary jurisdiction of commercial courts is appropriate.  Over the years, the Law Commission and Parliamentary Standing Committees have observed that due to high pendency of cases the judicial system is unable to dispose of cases in a timely manner.  The Law Commission in 2003 and 2015 recommended that a law be enacted to establish commercial courts to resolve commercial disputes of high value.  They argued that adjudication of high value commercial disputes requires specialised expertise, and has a larger impact on foreign investments and economic growth of the country.  [See, “Arrears and Backlog: Creating Additional Judicial (wo)man power”, Law Commission of India, Report No. 245, July 7, 2014, http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report245.pdf.]

As seen in Table 2 below, it has been recommended that the minimum value of cases being heard by commercial courts should be above rupees one crore.

Table 2: Recommendations of expert bodies on minimum value of commercial dispute

Year

Expert Body

Minimum value (in Rs)

2003

17th Law Commission

One crore (or five crore)

2009

The Commercial High Courts Bill, 2009

Five crore

2010

Select Committee on the Commercial High Courts Bill, 2009

One crore

2015

20th Law Commission

One crore

2015

The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Bill, 2015 

One crore

2015

Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice

Two crore

 

 

Reducing the minimum value to above rupees three lakh will increase the number of cases admitted in commercial courts and therefore slow down the priority given to relatively higher value cases.  Note that while examining the 2015 Act, the Standing Committee on Law and Justice (2015) recommended increasing the minimum value of commercial disputes from one crore rupees to two crore rupees.  It argued that setting a lower value may lead to the transfer of large number of cases which may overburden the commercial courts.  Therefore, the purpose behind their establishment may be defeated.

Annexure

Figure 1: Hierarchy of commercial courts proposed by the Ordinance

 

What steps have been taken in West Bengal after the notification of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 & The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015?

OR

What is the Territorial Jurisdiction of the Commercial Courts at Siliguri, Asansol, Alipore and Rajarhat?

OR

Whether a commercial dispute of substantial amount in the district of  Darjeeling, Jalpaiguri, Alipurduar, Coochbehar, North Dinajpur, South Dinajpur and Maldah will fall within the Jurisdiction of the Commercial Courts at Siliguri?

On 28th June 2016, the Judicial Department of the Govt. of West Bengal, by way of Notification No. 197-JL and in exercise of the power conferred by sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015 (4 of 2016) the Governor, after consultation with the High Court, Calcutta, vide Memo No.2304-RG dated the 27th June, 2016, inaugurated Four commercial courts (at Siliguri, Asansol, Alipore and Rajarhat) with the following territorial jurisdiction -

(a) the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Commercial Court at Alipore, the areas included within the districts of South 24 Parganas, Purba Medinipore and Paschim Medinipore;

(b) the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Commercial Court at Rajarhat, the areas included within the districts of North 24 Parganas, Nadia, Hooghly and Howrah;

(c) the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Commercial Court at Asansol, the areas included within the districts of Murshidabad, Birbhum, Bankura, Burdwan and Purulia;

(d) the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Commercial Court at Siliguri, the areas included within the districts of Darjeeling, Jalpaiguri, Alipurduar, Coochbehar, North Dinajpur, South Dinajpur and Maldah.

Thus the Commercial Court at Siliguri includes the districts of Darjeeling, Jalpaiguri, Alipurduar, Coochbehar, North Dinajpur, South Dinajpur and Maldah.

I have a commercial dispute ABOVE 20 LAKH BUT BELOW 30 LAKH in the district of  Darjeeling, Jalpaiguri, Alipurduar, Coochbehar, North Dinajpur, South Dinajpur or Maldah will it fall within the Jurisdiction of the Commercial Courts at Siliguri?

The Judicial Department of the Govt. of West Bengal by way of Notification No. 158 JL dated 20th March 2020 and in exercise of the power conferred by sub-section (IA) of section 3 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (4 of 2016), and in supersession of the earlier notification No. 254- JL, dated the 151h November 2018, was pleased to specify, the Pecuniary Jurisdiction of the Commercial Courts with immediate effect, where the value of the commercial disputes, as mentioned below:-

(a) in case of Commercial Courts at Siliguri, Asansol, Alipore, and Rajarhat, of an amount not less than rupees thirty lakh;

(b) in case of Commercial Courts within the territorial jurisdiction of the City Civil Court at Calcutta, of an amount-(i) not less than rupees three lakh and not more than rupees ten lakh exclusively ; and (ii) exceeding rupees ten lakh but not exceeding rupees one crore, concurrently with the Commercial Division of the High Court, Calcutta;

(c) in case of the Commercial Division of the High Court, Calcutta, of an amount exceeding rupees ten lakh.

 

Thus a commercial dispute EQUAL TO OR ABOVE 30 LAKH in the district of  Darjeeling, Jalpaiguri, Alipurduar, Coochbehar, North Dinajpur, South Dinajpur or Maldah will it fall within the Pecuniary Jurisdiction of the Commercial Courts at Siliguri.

 

What disputes are “Commercial Disputes” within the scope of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 & The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015?

OR

Ajay Chakraborty, a resident of Jalpaiguri District falling in Siliguri, who was owning ½ share of land located in Fulbari under Rajganj Block of Jalpaiguri, entered into an Agreement to Sell for an earnest amount of 30 Lakh for his share to Babu Ghosh, of Jalpaiguri Sadar. The Earnest Amount was to be forfeited in case of non-payment of full consideration within stipulated time. Now, whether the forfeit of the Earnest Money is a “Commercial Dispute” and thus will be filed before the Siliguri Commercial Court?

OR

Whether an Agreement to Sell for an immovable property (of 30 Lakhs as Earnest Money) to be used in TRADE AND COMMERCE is a Commercial Act the violation whereof will be a “Commercial Dispute” from the perspective of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 & The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015?

 

As per section 2(c) of The Commercial Courts Act, 2015, “commercial dispute” means a dispute arising out of––

(i) ordinary transactions of merchants, bankers, financiers and traders such as those relating to mercantile documents, including enforcement and interpretation of such documents;

(ii) export or import of merchandise or services;

(iii) issues relating to admiralty and maritime law;

(iv) transactions relating to aircraft, aircraft engines, aircraft equipment and helicopters, including sales, leasing and financing of the same;

(v) carriage of goods;

(vi) construction and infrastructure contracts, including tenders;

(vii) agreements relating to immovable property used exclusively in trade or commerce;

(viii) franchising agreements;

(ix) distribution and licensing agreements;

(x) management and consultancy agreements;

(xi) joint venture agreements;

(xii) shareholders agreements;

(xiii) subscription and investment agreements pertaining to the services industry including outsourcing services and financial services;

(xiv) mercantile agency and mercantile usage;

(xv) partnership agreements;

(xvi) technology development agreements;

(xvii) intellectual property rights relating to registered and unregistered trademarks, copyright, patent, design, domain names, geographical indications and semiconductor integrated circuits;

(xviii) agreements for sale of goods or provision of services;

(xix) exploitation of oil and gas reserves or other natural resources including electromagnetic spectrum;

(xx) insurance and re-insurance;

(xxi) contracts of agency relating to any of the above; and

(xxii) such other commercial disputes as may be notified by the Central Government.

Explanation.––A commercial dispute shall not cease to be a commercial dispute merely because

(a) it also involves action for recovery of immovable property or for realisation of monies out of immovable property given as security or involves any other relief pertaining to immovable property;

(b) one of the contracting parties is the State or any of its agencies or instrumentalities, or a private body carrying out public functions;

 

From a bare perusal, of Section 2(c) above including the explanations thereto it is noticed that the disputes arising out of agreements relating to immovable property used exclusively in trade or commerce will qualify to be a commercial dispute to be tried by Commercial Courts.

Hence, in the absence of clear use of land in the Second Question above, it is unclear that the land will be used for “Trade and Commerce” and hence will not fall within the definition of “Commercial Dispute” and accordingly will be tried by ordinary courts and not the Commercial Court at Siliguri.

The Land in Question in the Third Question above is a “Commercial Dispute” within the meaning of The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and will be filed before the Commercial Courts at Siliguri.

Total Pageviews of this Post

Google analytics