Allahabad High Court tells lawyers to stop naming courts as parties in petitions

The Allahabad High Court has urged lawyers to discontinue the practice of impleading courts and tribunals as parties in petitions challenging their orders, noting that the Supreme Court had deprecated this practice decades ago.

Justice Subhash Vidyarthi made the observation while hearing a criminal revision plea under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act. The plea challenged a family court order that directed proceedings to continue ex parte against the revisionist.

“It is high time that this practice should be stopped. Therefore, I request the learned advocates to desist from impleading unnecessary and improper parties, more particularly the Courts and Tribunals whose orders are challenged before the High Court and who cannot defend their orders,” the court said in its order dated July 20.

The court referred to Supreme Court rulings that had deprecated the practice of impleading courts as opposite parties. The Supreme Court had held that civil courts, which decide matters, are courts in the strictest sense, and neither the court nor the presiding officer defends the order before a superior court.

Despite these clear pronouncements, the High Court noted that several advocates practising before the Lucknow Bench continued to implead courts as opposite parties. Calling the practice “highly improper”, the judge reiterated that it must stop.

On the merits of the case, the court found that the revisionist had been given opportunities to file objections before the ex parte order was passed but failed to avail them. The court also noted that the revisionist had knowledge of the proceedings for a long time and had concealed the date of such knowledge in the revision plea.

“An order to proceed ex parte can only be recalled if the party gives a reasonable explanation for his absence before the Court when the matter was ordered to proceed ex parte. It must not be a case of negligence or want of bona fide attributable to such party,” the court observed.

Holding that the Family Court had committed no illegality in proceeding ex parte or rejecting the recall application, the High Court dismissed the revision plea.