Home Blog

Is unmarried woman having children through surrogacy against Indian society, SC seeks Centre opinion

By
LawForum Admin
-
0
The Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021 allows a widow, a divorced woman between the age of 35 and 45 years, and an infertile couple to avail the benefit of surrogacy.

The Supreme Court on December 5 questioned whether a single, unmarried woman having a child through surrogacy is an “accepted norm” in Indian society.

“A single woman bearing a child is an exception and not a rule in Indian society because our society says to have children within marriage. A single woman bearing a child is outside marriage… That is not the accepted norm of Indian society,” Supreme Court judge B.V. Nagarathna orally observed.

The Bench, also comprising Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, was hearing a petition filed by a 38-year-old single and unmarried woman to become a mother through surrogacy.

The petitioner, represented by senior advocate Saurabh Kirpal, said she was “heavily diabetic” and pregnancy would pose a grave risk to her.

“Even an unmarried woman has the right to have a child,” Mr. Kirpal submitted.

The Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021 allows a widow, a divorced woman between the age of 35 and 45 years, and an infertile couple to avail the benefit of surrogacy.

Mr. Kirpal said the law only banned commercial surrogacy. The purpose of the petitioner was obviously not towards that end. Limiting the right to become a mother and discriminating against a woman on the basis of her status of marriage was discriminatory and violative of her fundamental rights to equality and life under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

Justice Nagarathna said the Parliament had recognised the “potential” of a widow or a divorcee, who had gone through marriage and was struck by the “misfortune” of losing her partner through death or divorce, to have a child through surrogacy.

The petitioner’s side argued that it was not their “misfortune” which led the Parliament to allow divorcees and widows to have children through surrogacy. They argued that the exclusion of unmarried women boiled down to “patriarchal stigma” against them.

Justice Nagarathna said the law has made marriage a basis of classification, and not discrimination.

The judge said married and unmarried woman enjoy the same status and rights as far as termination of pregnancy was concerned. They were treated on par even in the case of adoption.

“But here we are concerned whether single women can have children through surrogacy when the Parliament has not permitted it… Should this court say unmarried women can go for surrogacy?” Justice Nagarathna said.

“Society may not be used to having a single woman bear children, but is that a reason to deny them the right? A multitude of women choose not to marry, some do not get married not because they wish to… Their choices have to be respected. We cannot force them to get married to have a child,” Mr. Kirpal submitted.

The petitioner’s lawyers said she had frozen her eggs in December 2023.

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, for the Centre, said unmarried women could undergo pregnancy through assisted reproductive technologies (ART).

“But then she would have to undergo pregnancy,” Mr. Kirpal said.

“We have a conundrum here. How many ART procedures have happened in India for unmarried women?” Justice Nagarathna asked the Centre.

The judge said “we are keeping in mind the pulse of Indian society”. Mr. Kirpal responded that the court should “keep in mind the pulse of the Indian Constitution”. The court issued notice to the Centre.

Source: The Hindu

Sensitive cases shifted from one bench to other, senior advocate Dushyant Dave alleges in open letter to CJI

By
LawForum Admin
-
0
Former president of Supreme Court Bar Association and senior advocate Dushyant Dave

Former president of Supreme Court Bar Association and senior advocate Dushyant Dave on December 6 wrote an open letter to Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud expressing his “anguish” on “sensitive” cases being taken away from specific benches and judges.

Cases, instead of remaining with the lead judge on a Bench, were listed before the associate judge when the latter starts heading a new Bench, which he said, is in clear violation of the Supreme Court Rules and the Handbook on Practice and Procedure of the Court which govern listing of cases. Most of these cases, Dave noted, were of matters pertaining to human rights, the functioning of constitutional institutions, democracy, freedom of speech etc.

“I have personally come across a number of cases listed before various Hon’ble Benches upon first listing and/ or in which notice have been issued, being taken away from those Hon’ble Benches and listed before other Hon’ble Benches. Despite first coram being available the matters are being listed before Hon’ble Benches in which second coram presides,” Dave wrote in the letter.

He further specifically mentioned that matters listed before Court No. 2, 4, 6, 7 amongst others have been shifted out and listed before other Benches, which is in clear violation of the Supreme Court Rules.

Curiously, the Seniority of the first coram is also being ignored in doing so, he said. “Our attention is also been drawn by esteemed Colleagues at the Bar, Seniors, and Advocates on Record (AoRs), about various cases in which they have appeared in the first instance on numerous occasions, later the matters being listed before different Benches,” the letter stated.

While Dave refused to enumerate further on these matters as many of them are pending before the court, he urged the CJI to look into the matter and take corrective measures immediately, as “such a practice does not augur well for the institution.”

The development comes a day after a petition challenging the Union government’s delay in appointing judges whose name had been cleared by the Collegium was not listed before Justice S.K. Kaul on Tuesday (December 5), even though it was earlier decided to be placed before him. Justice Kaul said neither had he deleted the matter from the cause list, nor was he unwilling to hear it. He had earlier heard the matter on November 20 and then posted it for December 5

“I had not deleted it or expressed unwillingness to take it up. I am sure the CJI is aware of it (the deletion). Some things are best left unsaid. We will see,” Justice Kaul said, according to Bar and Bench.

Know about the Advocate-on-Record system in the Supreme Court?

By
LawForum Admin
-
0

The Supreme Court this week pulled up an Advocate-on-Record (AoR) for filing a frivolous case and dismissed the public interest litigation. The Court censured the lawyer that an AoR cannot merely be a “signing authority.”

A bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sudhanshu Dhulia, and PK Mishra also called for a “comprehensive plan” for reforming and improving the AoR system of the top court, which will be drawn up in collaboration with the Bar.

But who is an AoR and why does the Supreme Court have a special category of advocates?

Who is an AoR?

Only an AoR can file cases before the Supreme Court. An AoR might engage other lawyers including senior counsels to argue before the Court but the AoR is essentially the link between the litigant and the highest court of the country.

After fulfilling an eligibility criteria and clearing a rather tough examination, an advocate is qualified to be an AoR.

Simply put, AORs are a pool of elite Delhi-based lawyers whose legal practice is mostly before the SC. They can appear before other courts too. The idea behind this practice is that a lawyer with special qualifications, picked by the Supreme Court itself, is equipped to appear for a litigant because it is a court of the last opportunity for the litigant.

How does one become an AoR?

The Supreme Court Rules, 2013 prescribe eligibility criteria for an AoR.

While an advocate has to clear an examination set by the Court itself, the advocate has to meet specific criteria to be eligible to appear for the exam. The advocate must train with a court approved AoR for at least one year to take up the exam. She must also have at least four years of practice before starting the training itself.

An advocate needs to score at least 60% i.e. a minimum of 240 marks out of 400 with at least 50% in each subject in a three-hour exam. The subjects include Practice and Procedure, Drafting, Professional Ethics and Leading Cases. Approximately 200-250 lawyers clear the exam to become AoRs.

An AoR must have an office in Delhi within a 16-kilometre radius of the SC. Additionally, she is required to give an undertaking to employ, within one month of being registered as an AoR, a registered clerk.

What are the rules governing the AoR system?

According to Section 30 of the Advocates Act, any lawyer enrolled with the Bar Council is entitled to practice law before any Court or tribunal in the country. However, the provision also categorically states that “nothing in the provision shall be deemed to affect the power of the Supreme Court to make rules under Article 145 of the Constitution.”

Under Article 145 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court is empowered to make rules and regulate its own procedure for hearing cases.

The AoR system is broadly based on the British practice of barristers and solicitors. While barristers wear the black gown and wig and argue cases, solicitors take up cases from clients. In the Federal Court, the colonial predecessor of the Supreme Court, “agents” would take up cases while barristers would argue. In High Courts, the arguing counsels were referred to as pleaders. Senior advocates in India are designated by the Court and wear a distinct gown. Like barristers, they cannot solicit clients and are only briefed by other lawyers, say for example, an AoR.

The Supreme Court’s website on the history of the Court states that the inaugural proceedings of the SC was done after “taking care to ensure that the Rules of the Supreme Court were published and the names of all the Advocates and agents of the Federal Court were brought on the rolls of the Supreme Court.”

Source: The Indian Express

Unstamped arbitration agreements invalid in law, says Supreme Court

By
LawForum Admin
-
0

A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled an arbitration agreement in an unstamped contract, that is without stamp duty having been paid or paid insufficiently, was not enforceable and was not valid. “Arbit­ration agreement not validated by the Sta­mp Act would stand non est (does not exist) in law ,” the majority (three against two) verdict held.

Legal experts said while this judgment would give some clarity and predictability, the interpretation that not paying stamp duty or paying it insufficiently on a contract with an arbitration clause would make the arbitration agreement invalid would lead to a situation of no timely recourse for resolving disputes.

“This will put a spanner in the works of many ongoing arbitral proceedings, with respondents taking nonpayment or insufficient payment as a preliminary objection for delaying the process. This will hamper urgent relief for a defect like the non-stamping of an agreement, which is curable. Also, in the case of unstamped international contracts not executed in India, it will complicate the process further,” said Vyapak Desai, lead, international dispute resolution and investigations practice, Nishith Desai Associates.

A five-judge Bench of Justice K M Joseph, Justice Ajay Rastogi, Justice Aniruddha Bose, Justice Hrishikesh Roy, and Justice C T Ravikumar decided whether the arbitration clause in a contract, which is required to be registered and stamped but has not been done, was valid and enforceable.

Justice Joseph, Justice Bose, and Justice Ravikumar ruled that “an instrument which is exigible (capable of being exacted) to stamp duty may contain an arbitration clause and which is not stamped cannot be said to be a contract enforceable in law within the meaning of Section 2(h) of the Contract Act (definition of contract) and is not enforceable under Section 2(g) of the Contract Act (void contracts)”. However, Justice Rastogi and Justice Roy said, in their dissenting opinion, that non-stamping or insufficient stamping would not render the arbitration agreement unenforceable. They said that such a defect (stamp deficiency) was curable.

In this case (NN Global Mercantile Pvt Ltd v. Indo Unique Flame Ltd & ors) the parties had entered into a sub-contract with an arbitration clause. After some dispute, the respondent had brought a suit invoking the bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner. The respondent had sought a resolution of the dispute through arbitration, which was rejected by a commercial court. Later, the Bombay High Court held the suit maintainable, which was then challenged before the apex court.

Tejas Karia, partner and head, arbitration, Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co, said the decision missed an opportunity to shore up the image of India as an arbitration-friendly jurisdiction.

The issue has been a bone of contention in several arbitration matters since the judgment in the case of SMS Tea Estates in 2011, followed by Garware Wall Ropes in 2019. The tilt of the law kept changing over time through various judgments in different contexts, leading to ambiguities and different positions taken by various courts in India. “The judgment settles the law with respect to an un-stamped agreement containing an arbitration clause, and will give finality and closure to litigation on this aspect before various HCs wherein varying views had emerged,” said Simran Brar, partner at Karanjawala & Co. Aslam Ahmed, partner, Singhania & Co. LLP, said the recent trend in arbitration had been minimum judicial intervention and this had consistently meant the court appointing an arbitrator had just to look at the arbitration clause.

(Source: Business Standard)

CJI Chandrachud takes daughters to Supreme Court, explains his job

By
LawForum Admin
-
0

The Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud’s foster daughters Mahi (16) and Priyanka (20), who have disabilities, expressed desires to see the Supreme Court.

To fulfil their wish the Chief Justice of India took them to the Supreme Court on January 6 and gave them a tour of the courtroom. Justice Chandrachud took his two foster daughters to his chamber and explained the work of the court.

According to sources, Justice Chandrachud, who reached the court premises around 10 am, took his daughters to his courtroom (first court) through the visitor’s gallery before the scheduled court timing of 10.30 am and told them, “See, this is where I sit.”

The sources said the CJI took his daughters to his chamber while explaining about his workplace and showed them the place where the judges sit and from where the lawyers argue their cases, PTI reported.

They said Justice Chandrachud brought his foster daughters, both differently-abled, to the court after they expressed desire to see his workplace.

CJI Chandrachud himself escorted them to his chamber and to Court Number 1 through the public gallery where he conducts all his hearings.

As per information, he was calmly explaining to his daughters, Mahi (16) and Priyanka (20), about the courtroom and the way proceedings were heard in the courtroom. CJI DY Chandrachud took over as CJI in November, 2022 and will serve for two years. He has two sons, Abbhinav and Chintan, who are lawyers at Bombay High Court and Brick Court Chambers, London, respectively.

242 new Fast Track Courts set up in India in five years

By
Gyanendra Keshri
-
0

For expeditious trial and disposal of cases, 242 new Fast Track Courts have been set up across the country in the last five years taking the total number to 838 as on 31st October 2022, as per information provided by Union Minister of Law and Justice Kiren Rijiju in parliament.

In a written reply to a question in the Rajya Sabha on 22nd December 2022, Rijiju informed that setting up of Fast Track Courts (FTCs) and its functioning comes within the domain of the State Governments who set up such courts as per their need and resources, in consultation with the respective High Courts.

As per information received from the High Courts,733 FTSCs including 413 exclusive POCSO Courts are operationalised in 28 States/UTs which have disposed a total of more than 1,24,000 cases since inception of the scheme. Total 1,93,814 cases are pending as on 31st October 2022, the minister informed.

As per information provided by the High Courts, 242 more FTCs have been setup up after 2017 (596 FTCs were existing as on 31st December 2017 which has increased to 838 FTCs as on 31st October 2022).

The Union Government started a Centrally Sponsored Scheme in October 2019 for setting up of 1023 Fast Track Special Courts (FTSCs) including 389 exclusive POCSO Courts in 31 States/UTs for expeditious trial and disposal of cases related to rape and POCSO Act, in pursuance to the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act 2018 and the direction of the Supreme Court of India in Suo Moto 1/2019 dated 25th July 2019.

The Scheme was initially for a period of one year spread over two Financial Years 2019-20 and 2020-21 at a total outlay of Rs 767.25 crore with Rs 474 crore as Central Share to be met from Nirbhaya Fund. In FY 2019-20, Rs 140 crore and in FY 2020-21, Rs 160 crore and in FY 2021-22, Rs 134.56 crore was released to States as Central Share.

The Cabinet further approved the continuation of the Scheme of FTSCs for two years i.e. up to March 2023 with a total budgetary outlay of Rs 1572.86 crore with Rs 971.70 crore as central share.

Each Fast Track Special Court comprises of 1 Judicial Officer and 7 Staff Members. Out of 31 States and UTs eligible, 28 have joined this scheme (Arunachal Pradesh, West Bengal and A&N Island are yet to join). As per information received from the High Courts,733 FTSCs including 413 exclusive POCSO Courts are operationalised in 28 States/UTs which have disposed a total of more than 1,24,000 cases since inception of the scheme. Total 1,93,814 cases are pending as on 31st October 2022, the minister informed.

Vice President takes on Supreme Court over collegium system of Judges’ appointment

By
LawForum Admin
-
0
Vice President of India Jagdeep Dhankhar.

The government versus Supreme Court tussle over the appointment of judges in the Supreme Court and high courts has again come under the spotlight with Vice President of India Jagdeep Dhankhar raising the issue in his maiden address in the Rajya Sabha.

The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Bill, passed unanimously by the Parliament, was “undone by the Supreme Court”, said Dhankhar, terming it is a “severe compromise of parliamentary sovereignty and disregard of the mandate of the people”.

The Bill which sought to overturn the collegium system of appointing Supreme Court and high court judges, was struck down by the Supreme Court.

Vice President said a law passed by Parliament, which reflects the will of the people, was “undone” by the Supreme Court and “the world does not know of any such instance”.

Citing provisions of the Constitution, he also said when a substantive question of law is involved, the issue can be looked into by the courts.

“Nowhere it says a provision can be run down,” Vice President Dhankhar said in the presence of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud.

Addressing the LM Singhvi memorial lecture in Delhi, the Vice President underlined that the Preamble of the Constitution mentions “We the people” and Parliament reflects the will of the people.

It means the power resides in the people – their mandate and their wisdom, he said.

Vice President Dhankhar referred to the NJAC Act, saying in 2015-16, Parliament was dealing with a constitutional amendment Act and as a matter of record the entire Lok Sabha voted unanimously.

In Rajya Sabha, it was unanimous, there was one abstention. “We the people – their ordainment was converted into a constitutional provision. Power of the people, which was expressed through a legitimate platform, that power was undone. The world does not know of any such instance,” he said.

The NJAC Act, which sought to overturn the collegium system of appointing Supreme Court and high court judges, was struck down by the Supreme Court which described it as unconstitutional.

“I appeal to the people here, they constitute a judicial elite class, thinking minds, intellectuals – please find out a parallel in the world where a constitutional provision can be undone,” he said.

Vice President Dhankhar had expressed similar sentiments at a Constitution Day event in Delhi on November 26.

He said he was “startled that after this verdict (NJAC), there was no whispering in Parliament. It was taken as such. This is too serious an issue”.

Referring to the doctrine of basic structure developed by the Supreme Court, he said “we have taken it as such”.

“But as a modest student of law, can parliamentary sovereignty ever be compromised … can a successive Parliament be bound by what has been done by earlier Parliament,” he said.

He said harmonious working of the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary is vital for the growth of democracy. “Any incursion, howsoever subtle, in the domain of one by another has the capacity to unsettle the apple cart of governance,” the Vice President said.

SCO pursues its internal policy based on the principles of mutual trust and benefit: Kiren Rijiju

By
LawForum Admin
-
0
Union Minister of Law and Justice Kiren Rijiju.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) pursues its internal policy based on the principles of mutual trust and benefit, Union Minister of Law and Justice Kiren Rijiju has said.

Speaking at the ninth meeting of ministers of justice of the SCO Member States, Rijiju said the SCO pursues its internal policy based on the principles of mutual trust and benefit, equal rights, consultations, respect for the diversity of cultures and aspiration towards common development.

He mentioned the e-Courts Project, conceptualized as a Mission Mode Project of the Government of India, as a part of the National e-Governance Plan based on the “National Policy and Action Plan for Implementation of Information and Communication Technology in the Indian Judiciary”, established after long-standing efforts on the parts of our government during the difficult times of Covid 19 Pandemic and helped the courts to perform all the task of Justice Delivery in virtual mode.

The project is under implementation since 2007 under the joint partnership of Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India and the e-Committee of the Supreme Court of India. It is aimed at transforming the judicial system of the country by ICT enablement of courts and enhance the judicial productivity, both qualitatively and quantitatively for making the justice delivery system accessible, cost effective, transparent, accountable, efficient and time bound. The services under the project cater to all key stakeholders including the judiciary, High Courts, The District & Subordinate Courts and the citizens/litigants/lawyers/advocates.

He also highlighted Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism, which offer a faster, transparent and accessible option to the citizens of the country. In fact, they were one of the major factors to achieve “Ease of Doing Business” by improving dispute resolution with regard to contract enforcement among the national or global stakeholders. Another very important ADR mechanism is Mediation. Mediation is a voluntary dispute resolution process. To have a consolidated law on mediation, the Government of India has introduced the Mediation Bill, 2021 in the Parliament. He apprised the gathering of the high priority, the Government has accorded to resolving disputes through ADR; framing business facilitating laws and rules, including Commercial Courts Act and Arbitration Laws with a view to make India a preferred destination for investment and businesses.

As part of activities of Justice Ministers’ Forum, the Minister congratulated all  Ministers of the SCO Member States for their efforts towards achieving the goals of the SCO and assured India’s full cooperation in the future as well. Also, in this emerging era of digitization and new possibilities, He called upon all the SCO partners to commit to promote technology in all fields and adopting, developing new mechanisms like ADRs in the Legal System of all the SCO Member States. Earlier, the Experts Working Group discussed issues related to the provision of legal services to individuals and/or legal entities, and stressed on the need of the development of information technologies in the provision of services.

Emphasizing the mutual understanding reached on the development of the legal systems of the SCO Member States, taking into account the agreements and tasks provided for in the SCO Development Strategy until 2025, the Ministers of (Law and) Justice of the SCO Member States declare the following:

1. To carry out interaction between the Ministries of (Law and) Justice of the SCO Member States, contributing to the preservation and expansion of mutual trust, good-neighborliness and friendship between the SCO Member States.

2. To continue work on the implementation of the Cooperation Agreement between the Ministries of Law and Justice of the SCO Member States, signed in Dushanbe on August 18, 2015.

3. To continue strengthening cooperation between the Ministries of (Law and) Justice of the SCO member States in order to promote the development of legal systems.

4. To organize mutual visits of representatives of the Ministries (Law and) Justice of the SCO Member States, hold SCO regional conferences, bilateral symposiums, seminars, workshops and joint courses on topical legal issues and exchange experience in this field.

5. To continue the activities of Expert Working Groups on forensic expertise and legal services. The Ministers of (Law and ) Justice and senior officials / experts from the Ministries of Law & Justice of India, Kazakhstan, China, Kyrgyz Republic, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan participated in the three days’ deliberations. The next Meeting of the Ministers of Justice of the SCO Member States will be held in 2023 in China.

Govt emphasising to enhance the use of Hindi in legal education and proceedings: Kiren Rijiju

By
LawForum Admin
-
0
Union Minister of Law and Justice Kiren Rijiju.

The Government is emphasising to promote and enhance the use of Hindi and other regional languages in Legal Education and to carry out the legal proceedings of the Supreme Court, High Courts and the other judicial wings, Union Minister of Law and Justice Kiren Rijiju has said.

We are digitising 65000 words Legal glossary and make them available to public and creating an online platform to crowd–sourcing of the coining of legal terminology for Indian Languages, Rijiju said in a written reply in Lok Sabha, the lower house of Parliament, on December 9. 

Further, this Ministry is in the process to Identify frequently used words in the legal documents and creating a transitive vocabulary/common core vocabulary by coining words from common roots which would be adaptable by all the Indian languages so that the translation of legal documents from one Indian language to another Indian language would be easier, he said.

According to Rijiju, the Ministry of Law and Justice is planning to convene a meeting of Vice Chancellors of Law Universities, representatives of Bar and Judiciary to prepare Ten Year Perspective action Plan for Promotion of Indian Languages in Courts and Legal Education.

Further, a committee under chairmanship of Hon’ble (Retd.) Chief Justice of India Sh. Bobde has been constituted by the BCI to recommend measures to enhance the use of Hindi and other Regional languages in Legal Education.

The Ministry of Home Affairs has informed that enabling Constitutional and Legal provisions in this regard are already in place, the minister said.

As per Article 348 of the Constitution and Section 7 of the Official Language Act, 1963 there are provisions of optional use of Hindi and other (Languages included in the 8th Schedule of the Indian Constitution) in the proceedings and judgments etc. of the courts. Under the aforementioned provisions, optional use of Hindi in the proceedings of High Courts of Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Bihar was authorised in the year 1950, 1969, 1971 and 1972 respectively.

New education policy also emphasises the need for promoting Hindi and other regional languages in Legal and other technical education.

The National Education Policy, 2020 in its para 20.4 stated that “Legal education needs to be competitive globally, adopting best practices and embracing new technologies for wider access to and timely delivery of Justice. At the same time, it must be informed and illuminated with Constitutional values of Justice -Social, Economic, and Political and directed towards National reconstruction through instrumentation of democracy, rule of law, and human rights. The curricula for legal studies must reflect socio-cultural contexts along with, in an evidence-based manner, the history of legal thinking, principles of justice, the practice of jurisprudence, and other related content appropriately and adequately. State institutions offering law education must consider offering bilingual education for future lawyers and judges in English and in the language of the State in which the Institution is situated”.

Govt appoints 15 judicial, technical members at Company Law Tribunal

By
lfadmin
-
0

The government has appointed a total of 15 judicial and technical members at the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), which is grappling with a shortage of judges.

The NCLT adjudicates matters related to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) and companies law.

As many as 9 judicial members and 6 technical members have been appointed to the NCLT, according to an official order.

These members have been appointed for a period of five years from the date of taking charge or till they attain the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier.

Former Madras High Court Judge Justice (Retd) T Krishna Valli, former Allahabad High Court Judge Justice (Retd) Vikas Kunvar Srivastav, Senior Government Advocate at the Department of Legal Affairs Mahendra Khandelwal, CAT Judicial Member Bidisha Banerjee, advocates Praveen Gupta and Ashok Kumar Bhardwaj are among the judicial members.

Others are Retd District Judge – Punjab Kuldip Kumar Kareer, Retd District Judge – Gautam Budh Nagar Vishesh Sharma and District Court Judge in Commercial Court, Delhi Higher Judicial Service Sanjiv Jain.

The technical members are Chartered Accountant Prabhat Kumar; UCO Bank’s former Executive Director Charan Singh; former Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) Member Anu Jagmohan Singh; Retd Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax Ashish Verma; former Director and Head of AML Compliance at CitiBank India Madhu Sinha; and former Secretary at the Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying Atul Chaturvedi (IAS (Retd)), as per the order dated November 5.

The NCLT has a total of 28 benches, with a sanctioned strength of 63 members. This includes 31 each from the judicial and administrative sides along with its president, who heads the principal bench in New Delhi.

In October, NCLT President Chief Justice (Retd) Ramalingam Sudhakar said the scope of adjudication under IBC has been rewarding and result oriented despite “several apparent and noticeable shortcomings like periodical reduction of members, presently 28 out of 63, and infrastructure which requires to be improved in metropolitan cities like Mumbai, Delhi, Chennai and Kolkata.”

The tribunal is also facing shortage of support staff, including court masters, officers, assistant registrars and stenographers.

(Source: PTI)

12Page 1 of 2