The bench remarked, “The Registrar (Judicial Listing) has submitted a report along with an explanation by various staff members. If all the reports are read together, it shows the sorry state of affairs.”
New Delhi: The Supreme Court highlights the challenges within the Apex Court registry, emphasizing the need for prompt decree draws as per court orders. Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, in response to the prolonged delay in drawing decrees, opted to address the issue rather than penalize the concerned staff.
READ ALSO: S.300 IPC |Odisha Court Sentences Five Family Members to Life Imprisonment
The registry failed to execute a divorce decree in accordance with a court order issued back in September. This delay led to the stalling of ten cases between the involved parties. Upon inquiry, the Court requested a detailed report to understand the reasons behind the five-month delay in decree issuance.
Reviewing the submitted report, the Court expressed disappointment “sorry state of affairs”. The registry staff attributed the delay to the misplacement of the original settlement terms. However, the Court found this explanation unsatisfactory, emphasizing that it’s the registry’s duty to execute decrees as per court orders.
The Court then asked the registry to furnish a report as to why there was no decree drawn even after five months of the order. When the response came, the Court said,
“The Registrar (Judicial Listing) has submitted a report along with an explanation by various staff members. If all the reports are read together, it shows the sorry state of affairs.”
As per the report, the staff said that it had misplaced the original terms of settlement. The Bench said,
“We fail to understand how the registry can refuse to draw the decree on the ground that the original settlement terms were not available. When there is an order from the court to draw a decree in a particular manner, it is the duty of the registry to do so. Another excuse was invented: the court master had not forwarded the original settlement terms. The report shows that even the said excuse was totally incorrect, as the settlement terms were forwarded by the court master, which were misplaced due to no fault of the court master of this court.”
READ ALSO: Stop Pooja-Archana | “We Should Bow Down To The Constitution”: Justice Abhay S.Oka
“The registry has to note that unless the decree is made available, the order of this Court is of no use to the parties. All of us who are part of the justice delivery system must remember that we exist for the benefit of the litigants,” the order stated.
CASE TITLE: Vinit Vaidya vs. Manjiri Vinit Vaidhya
