Lack of infrastructure, appointments lead to rise in pendency

Lack of infrastructure coupled with non-appointment of heads of various quasi-judicial bodies lead to rise in pendency of cases which could be reduced through mediation, a former apex court judge today said.
Justice Ashok Bhan, President National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission said issues of manpower and unnecessary adjournments sought by lawyers are also responsible for the backlog of cases.
"Non-appointment of presidents at different fora after vacancies arise or long delay in filling up the vacancies, lack of infrastructure and manpower and unnecessary adjournments by lawyers are responsible for the pendency of cases in the various consumer fora," he said while speaking at a seminar on "Mediation in Consumer Disputes".

Despite these issues, the consumer fora have a disposal rate of 91 per cent, Bhan said.
He also suggested that the number of cases that go in appeal against a verdict of the consumer fora, sometimes all the way to the Supreme Court, should be limited especially where the amount involved is Rs one lakh or less.
"Even for a minor amount, parties go up to Supreme Court in appeal. Let us try and limit the number of cases that go in appeal," he said.

While welcoming the idea of mediation for speedy redressal of consumer disputes, Bhan said this alternate mode of dispute resolution would be of real help if it can resolve the cases that have been pending in the fora for years.

He also said that mediation should be done at national and state levels where the amount involved ranges from Rs 10 lakh to over Rs one crore and not at the district level where the compensation sought may be less than Rs one lakh.
"Real help would be if the cases currently pending are resolved through mediation. Especially, in cases where complaints are for more than Rs one crore or where the state commission has awarded Rs 10 lakh or more compensation.
Bhan also said while mediation is a very good option to take away the burden from the courts, there are some hurdles in this endeavour like absence of trained mediators and often adversarial conduct of lawyers.

"We do not have trained mediators. We need to train them, he said adding, "While judges have welcomed mediation, lawyers have not supported it. They have been adversarial."
He also cautioned those advocating mediation for resolving consumer disputes to "think about it before taking a plunge into it".