Rule of law should not be diluted by interim orders

The legal process in India often takes a long time. High pendency of cases is both a symptom and a cause. So what, one might argue. The wheels of the law may be turning very slowly, but at least they sure do grind, right? Not necessary. The duration of litigation has a profound impact on the delivery and quality of justice.

Well aware of the delay in final adjudication, but eager to ensure effective judicial remedies, courts rely on interim orders or ‘reliefs’ to preserve and protect the interests of the litigants. The transition from the rule of law to the rule of interim law has its own challenges. An interim order, when passed in favor of the party losing out in the final award, can effectively set aside any relief granted in the final award. We may examine two examples which show the harmful consequences of delay and interim orders.

Sunita and Vishal entered into a contract in which Sunita promised to give 20% shares of her company to Vishal under certain conditions. Vishal files a civil suit to enforce the contract and in the interim, the court restrains Sunita from changing the capital structure of her company. After 30 years, the court ruled in favor of Sunita, but due to economic changes, the company and its shares had lost their value. Despite winning the case, Sunita suffered a huge financial loss.

In the next example, a landlady wanted to evict a tenant living in her own apartment. The court ordered all parties to maintain status quo until the final determination of the suit, which means the tenant can continue to reside, but will have to pay compensation to the landlady if he loses the suit. After 60 years, the landlady wins the case, but she has already struggled for years with legal and rental expenses. Even if she gets compensation and possession of the property, it cannot compensate for her years of struggle. The benefit of the judgment may be more relevant to his heirs.

The examples demonstrate a distinctive feature of the practice of Indian law, which sets it apart from other liberal democracies: the time lag between the initial hearing on interim reliefs and the final binding decision after all appeals have been filed. In the worst case, this time limit extends beyond the lifetime of the plaintiff.

From a legal perspective, interim reliefs and final reliefs differ widely in terms of the discretionary powers exercised by the courts. In matters of final relief, courts are strictly bound by precedential value and are generally against carving out exceptions to established principles. Courts have wide discretionary powers to grant interim relief depending on the unique facts and circumstances of the case. Even with the best of intentions, arbitrariness can permeate decision making.

This situation presents a different challenge in the Indian context, both in terms of legal and business strategy and tactics. As interim orders acquire utmost importance, they become central to negotiation strategy for business and legal purposes. It all depends on getting a favorable interim order in the form of bail, stay or injunction at the initial stage of a dispute. It is a routine procedure for an interim order to go through all the layers of the appeal process, prolonging the outcome of the main suit. From a commercial point of view, the aim is to ensnare the other party in a legal trap from which it cannot extricate itself. This is particularly relevant when contesting parties have a disproportionate waiting time for the process. The final legal outcome becomes a distant, hazy objective.

All of this contributes to prolonged legal uncertainty, which is exacerbated when specific cases are sometimes given priority because of wider implications. This unpredictability is bad for business and the maintenance of public order. What is the solution? Reducing pendency and adopting Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) are two measures that are being worked on, one without much success and the other without much progress. Are there any other untested options to deal with the current situation?

Whether new technologies such as artificial generative intelligence (AGI) can be used to provide a draft final order to assist a judge in final judgment and interim order, so as to bridge the gap between the reliefs to be granted at each stage can be reduced? AGI tools can be used to indicate statistically probable final orders in cases such as the examples mentioned earlier, considering the facts and circumstances of each case. They may enable the courts to take more informed decisions on interim orders. This will reduce the deviation between different orders and also reduce the typical distortions seen in the long cases.

The problem has become serious and needs immediate solution. The erosion of public faith in the legal process undermines the basic purpose of law: maintaining order and administering justice.

By tackling long-drawn litigation and its heavy reliance on interim orders, India can enhance the efficiency of its legal system, fostering a fair and accessible framework for resolving disputes. Such reforms will help the legal system uphold the rule of law and maintain public confidence.

These are the personal views of the author.

Updated: July 13, 2023, 08:15 PM IST