IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1326 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO.655 OF 1983 M/s.M.R.Bhansali .. Plaintiffs Vs. P.M.D.Thackersey & Ors. .. Defendants And Naresh R. Kara & Ors. .. Respondents Ms.Payal Gandhi i/by Shah and Sanghvi for the plaintiffs. Ms.Bendicta Lobo i/by Mulla & Mulla for the defendants. CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 14th October 2008. : 14th October 2008. : 14th October 2008. P.C.: . Heard learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff in support of the Chamber Summons. I have also heard the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents has no objection if the Chamber Summons is granted. 2. Hence, Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) with a modification that while 2 carrying out amendment, the 7th defendant shall be numbered as the 1st defendant and the proposed 10th to 15th defendants shall be numbered as 2nd to 7th defendants. Amendment to be carried out within six weeks. 3. By order dated 03rd October 2008 an explanation of the registry was called for. When the suit appeared on board on 11th September 2008, a specific order was passed by this Court that after disposal of the aforesaid Chamber Summons the suit shall be listed on board for framing of issues. Notwithstanding the said clear order, the suit was placed on board on 03rd October 2008 under the caption of directions though the Chamber Summons was made returnable on 14th October 2008. 4. I have perused the explanation submitted by the Assistant as well as Section Officer of the board department. It is obvious that the concerned members of the staff cannot be blamed for this lapse. The lapse is on account of a very defective procedure adopted by the registry of the Original Side. Though I find that a specific decision was taken on subject No.14 in the Chamber Meeting of the Full House held on 23rd August 3 2008, the registry on the Original Side has chosen not to implement the said decision. The decision taken in the Chamber Meeting held on 23rd August 2008 reads thus: ". Discussed. . The Orders of the Court shall be duly implemented and even for future purposes no Minutes Books need be maintained. The original Order sheets passed by the Court shall be annexed to the main files. . The Guidelines/Rule shall stand modified accordingly. . The Registry to take follow-up action." Thus, on the administrative side it was resolved that the orders of this Court shall be duly implemented and even for future purposes no minutes books need to be maintained and the original order-sheets passed by the Court shall be annexed to the main files. The orders of the Court referred to in the resolution passed in the Chamber Meeting are orders dated 02nd November 2007 and 4 18th October 2007 passed by this Court in Summary Suit No.2406 of 1985 as well as order dated 07th March 2008 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.2069 of 2007. 5. It will be necessary to refer to the order dated 02nd November 2007. The said order takes a note of the fact that the procedure adopted by the Original Side registry is defective. The procedure which is being followed may work when there are handful number of matters on the daily board of Original Side. It will be necessary to refer to the relevant parts of order dated 02nd November 2007. In paragraph Nos.5 and 6 this Court has observed thus: "5. ...... The procedure which is followed on the Appellate Side needs to be introduced with necessary modification. Some members of the staff must be entrusted with the responsibility of reading the orders passed by the Court in every matter. This will ensure that the orders and directions issued by the Courts are fully complied with and the matters are listed on the daily board under the requisite captions as directed by the court. 5 This will reduce the work load of the Associates as well as the Board Clerk. If the existing procedure is continued, inadvertent errors committed by the Associate are bound to be carried forward without any check and scrutiny. In a given case if order of the Court directs that a suit should be set down for recording of evidence and if Associate makes a noting that the suit is for settlement of issues, the suit will be listed under a wrong caption of "Issues" as no one in the office reads the orders of the Court. Therefore, the Registrar, Original Side and Prothonotary and Senior Master needs to re-examine the procedure followed on the Original Side. 6. It is also necessary to re-examine whether the practice of maintaining the minutes books should be continued. The reason is that the computer record in respect of all the orders of the Court is available with a back up data and in case the original orders are misplaced, the computer data can be made use of. The original orders signed by the concerned Judges are pasted in the minutes book. I find that for 6 want of adequate space for storage, the minutes books are scattered over different places in the High Court building. Some of the minutes books have been damaged and destroyed by termites. The requirement of maintaining minutes book appears to have become obsolete. Therefore, the practice of maintaining minutes book also needs to be reconsidered. The original orders can be retained in the case papers." 6. Firstly, there is no procedure of maintaining roznama of the proceedings of the suit. In the all the trial Courts, the roznama of the proceedings of a suit is maintained in some form. However, that is not done on the original side. The second flaw is that after the orders are passed by the Court and matters are received back by the registry, no one in the registry reads the order passed by this Court to ensure that compliances are made with the orders of the Court, the matters are listed on board as per directions of the Court and the matters are listed indicating proper stage under the proper caption. The procedure which is followed on the Appellate Side is that when the files containing the orders of the Court are received by the concerned 7 section, there is a designated officer who reads the orders of the Court and make appropriate notings to ensure that effect is given to the orders of the Court and the said orders are implemented. A care is taken to make proper notings on the farad sheet such as "Affidavit in reply not filed", "Notice is not received back", "Notice is not properly served" etc. In old suits listed on board for directions, the Judge has to go through the entire record to ascertain whether writ of summons has been served. In fact there has to be a noting made on the farad sheet on this aspect. Moreover, the files of the suits are in most shabby conditions. The papers/documents are never arranged in proper order. In terms of the aforesaid order dated 02nd November 2007, the registry had taken follow up action and a detailed note was placed by the registry before the Chamber Meeting held on 23rd August 2008 suggesting changes in the practice of maintenance and preservation of minutes books by the Original Side registry. The said note was prepared on the basis of judicial order passed by this Court. As stated earlier, the resolution passed by the Full House is that the orders of the Court shall be duly implemented. In terms of the decision taken in Chamber Meeting dated 23rd August 2008, the registry will have to take following 8 steps: (i) The existing minute books shall be properly preserved and a proper data of all the minute books, judge-wise and date wise, shall be prepared/maintained. (ii) Large number of minutes books are in torn condition. Some of the minutes books are damaged by termites. Work of restoration of the said minutes books will have to be undertaken and after restoring the minutes books, the same shall be properly bound and preserved neatly. (iii) The registry should consider of preparing a soft copy of the old minutes books by scanning the same. (iv) Adequate storage facilities will have to be made available for storing the minutes books in chronological order. (v) As directed by Division Bench of this 9 Court by order dated 07th March 2008 in Writ Petition No.2069 of 2007, the present practice of writing of minutes in separate minute books and affixing the original orders therein shall be discontinued and common practice of writing all minutes on the farad sheet and affixing the original orders thereto shall be immediately implemented. (vi) The Registrar General will immediately appoint requisite number of officers/members of the staff to scrutinise the files of the matters after the same are received from the concerned Courts. As done on the Appellate Side, the concerned officers will examine the directions/orders of the Court minutely and will take proper notings which will be made available to the board section. The said staff members shall ensure that proper notings are made on the farad sheet regarding service, filing of affidavits, pleadings etc. The such notings shall be also 10 made immediately before placing the matters on board. The practice followed in this behalf on the Appellate Side will have to be followed with necessary modification. (vii) The Registry shall ensure that before placing the matters on board, the pleadings, affidavits and other documents are filed in chronological order. 7. I am informed that notwithstanding the judicial direction issued by the Division Bench of this Court on 07th march 2008 and a decision taken by the Full House, the Associates are still required to maintain the minute books. In consonance with decision of the Full House, the said practice will have to be immediately done away with simultaneously aforesaid procedure indicated above will have to be introduced. 8. A copy of this order shall be forwarded to the Registrar General as well as the Registrar (O.S.) and the Prothonotary and Senior Master. 11 9. The Registrar General of this Court will ensure that a detailed report is submitted as regards steps taken for implementation of the judicial orders passed by this Court as well as the implementation of the decision taken in the Chamber Meeting held on 23rd August 2008. For consideration of the report of the Registrar General of this Court, the suit shall be placed on board for directions on 12th November 2008. 10. It is made clear that it is not necessary to take action against the concerned staff members on account of lapse as the said officers are not responsible for the said lapse. (A.S. Oka,J)