A Synopsis Cannot Run Into 128 Pages ! Registry Should Have Asked Litigant To Trim It Down: Supreme Court
|The Supreme Court in its Order has stated that the Registry should have asked the litigant, who is not a trained lawyer, to trim down the synopsis after remarking that it cannot run into 128 pages.
The Court directed, “Let the Registrar (Judicial) take note of this, particularly the cases where litigants are allowed to appear in person.”
The Bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah observed, “The appellant, who has appeared in person, has filed a synopsis running into 128 pages, loaded with details much of which is not relevant for our purposes. We understand that the appellant is not a trained lawyer, but it is for the Registry to have asked the appellant to trim down the synopsis. A synopsis cannot run into 128 pages!”
The Appellant appeared in-person.
The Court dismissed the Appeal filed by the Appellant challenging the order of the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court. The High Court had set aside the order of the Family Court that dismissed her application under Section 125 of the CrPC for non-prosecution and restored it for adjudication on merits.
The Appellant had filed an application under Section 125 of the CrPC for maintenance. The Family Court dismissed the application for non-prosecution after the Appellant failed to appear on multiple dates.
Aggrieved by the dismissal, the Appellant moved the High Court under Section 482 of the CrPC. Following the direction of the Supreme Court in an earlier round of litigation, the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court presided over the case. In its order, the High Court set aside the dismissal and restored the Appellant’s application under Section 125 of the CrPC to its original number. The High Court further directed the Family Court to decide the case within three months.
The Supreme Court noted, “We see absolutely no reason as to why we should interfere with the aforesaid impugned order. The said order is in favour of the appellant and moreover it only directed the Family Court Agra to adjudicate the matter afresh which was earlier dismissed by the Family Court, Agra for non-prosecution. The appellant instead of appearing before the Family Court, Agra has directly challenged this order of the High Court before this Court, which we think is not proper.”
Consequently, the Court held, “As we see no reason to interfere with the impugned order dated 20.12.2019, the civil appeal stands dismissed.”
Accordingly, the Supreme Court dismissed the Appeal.
Cause Title: D v. State Of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 991)