JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA, NEW DELHI

FACULTY OF LAW

ASSIGNMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL ETHICS, LAWYERING AND BAR-BENCH

RELATIONS (CLINICAL- III)

Issues and Challenges in Legal Drafting - An Ethical Viewpoint

PRESENTED BY:
NAME: ASHAY KAUSHIK
Student ID- 20162493
IXth Semester, 5th YEAR
B.A. LL.B (Hons.) (Self- financed),

SUBMITTED TO:
Office of the Dean, Faculty of Law, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi

(Submitted on 22nd November, 2020)

1|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This Dissertation on the interesting topic of “Issues and Challenges in Legal Drafting - An Ethical
Viewpoint” as my course assignment for IXth Semester, that I have undertaken under the flagship of
Faculty of Law, Jamia Millia Islamia, would be incomplete without thanking all the people I am
deeply indebted for being there. I would like to thank everybody who has been instrumental in
making this dissertation much more than a monotonous research exercise, an inclusive learning
opportunity.

At the very outset, I would like to acknowledge the immense contribution that my professor for the
subject “Profession & Legal Ethics”, Ms. Karishma Sheikh has had on this work. By creating the
basic framework of the subject and through her excellent lectures she has carved a deep
understanding of the nuances of Legal and Professional ethics and its various aspects on my mind.
Further, I would like to thank my encouraging classmates who never backed off whenever I needed
them to clarify any concept that I couldn’t grab during the class lectures. Last but not the least, I
would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the unending efforts, support, and confidence
my parents and brother has reposed in me. All of them have been a guiding lamp and an inspiration
for my life and the same can has been imbibed in this dissertation indeed.

Ashay Kaushik,
B.A. LL.B (Hons.) (Self- financed),
IXth Semester, 5th Year
Student ID- 20162493
Roll No- 16BLW024

2|Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF CASES........................................................................................................................... 5

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................. 7

ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................. 8

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 9

LEGAL DRAFTING- ................................................................................................................. 11

History ...................................................................................................................................... 11
Evolution .................................................................................................................................. 12

STANDARDS OF LEGAL DRAFTING AT VARIOUS LEVELS OF INDIAN COURTS: .. 15

IMPACT OF LEGAL DRAFTING ON JUSTICE SYSTEM: ................................................. 23

Affects Rights of the Parties: ..................................................................................................... 26
Causes Delay and Pendency: ..................................................................................................... 27
Triggers Unprofessional Behavior: ............................................................................................ 29

ISSUES IN LEGAL DRAFTING DUE TO LOW STANDARD: ............................................. 31

Amendment of Pleadings: ......................................................................................................... 31
Delay: ....................................................................................................................................... 34

EMPERICAL ANALYSIS -360 DEGREE PERSPECTIVES .................................................. 35

Inadequate Training in Law Schools: ........................................................................................ 37
Lack of Infield Learning Opportunity: ....................................................................................... 39
Copy Paste Approach: ............................................................................................................... 41
An analysis of Delay and Pendency:............................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

SUGGESTIONS AND WAY OUT. ........................................................................................... 42

3|Page
CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... 43

BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................................................................................................... 44

APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................. 46

4|Page
 LIST OF CASES

SR. NO. CASE TITLE CITATION

1. Addl Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras-I vs. MANU/TN/0031/1980

Gangabai Charitie

2. Cropper v Smith (1884) 26 Ch. D. 700 (CA)

3. Calcutta Taxi Association and Ors. vs. D.K. MANU/WB/0753/2002

Banerjee and Ors

4. Income Tax Officer, 'A' Ward, Companies District MANU/WB/0087/1968

I, Calcutta and Ors. vs. State Bank of India

5. Qudrat Ullah vs. Municipal Board, Bareilly MANU/SC/0418/1973

6. Pushpa Sharma vs. V.V. Gujral and Ors MANU/DE/0308/2014.

7. The State of Karnataka and Ors. vs. Ranganatha MANU/SC/0062/1977

Reddy and Ors.

8. Delta International Limited vs. Shyam Sundar MANU/SC/0258/1999

Ganeriwalla & Another

9. State of U.P. vs. Jai Bir Singh MANU/SC/0360/2005

10. Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board vs. MANU/SC/0257/1978

A. Rajappa and Ors.

11. Ram Prasad Banerjee vs. Nitikona Choudhury and MANU/GH/0964/2017

Ors.

12. Bijlee Karmachari Sangh, M.P. and Ors. vs. M.P. MANU/MP/0293/1985.
Electricity Board, Jabalpur and Ors.

13. Virender Nath Gautam vs Satpal Singh & Ors (2007) 3 SCC 617.

14. P. vs. P. and R MANU/MH/0234/1982

15. Siyaram Roy vs. The State of Bihar and Ors MANU/BH/0475/2019.

16. Gurmelsing Gajesing Nehra and Ors. vs. State of MANU/MH/1989/2011

Maharashtra and Ors.

17. Delhi Express Travels Pvt. Ltd. vs. International MANU/DE/0739/2009

5|Page
 Air Transport Association and Ors.

18. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly 550 U.S. 544 (2007).

19. Conley v. Gibson 355 U.S. 41 (1957

20. Ashcroft v. Iqbal 129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009).

21. Ravajeetu Builders & Developers v. JT 2009(13) SC 366.

Narayanaswamy & Sons & others

22. Royal Talkies, Hyderabad and Ors. V. ESIC , AIR 1978 SC 1478

23. Ramos-Barrientos v. Bland 2008 WL 474426.

24. Chander Kanta Bansal Vs. Rajinder Singh Anand (2008) 5 SCC 117.

25. Mahila Ramkali Devi & Ors. Vs. Nandram (Dead) (2015) 13 SCC 132.
through Legal Representatives & Ors.

26. Jai Jai Ram Manohar Lal v. National Building 1969 AIR 1267.
Material Supply

27. Pirgonda Hongonda Patil vs. Kalgonda Shidgonda AIR 1957 SC 363
Patil

6|Page
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The Methodology adopted while making this assignment is Partly Doctrinal and Partly Empirical.

Doctrinal Research:

The Report consists of two parts. One analyses the international standards of Pleadings with special
emphasis to Civil Law, Common Law and Roman Law. This part has been dealt with Doctrinal
Research analysis, while the other part is empirical in nature.

Empirical Research:

For the sheer dearth of authoritative discourse with respect to the standards of Legal Drafting in
Indian Courts and the various aspects in that regard an empirical research is resorted to. For this
purpose a brief survey is taken up on a sample size of 101 data subjects who are relatively informed
on the topic by virtue of being based at urban settlements with access to resources.

7|Page
 ABSTRACT

“Drafting it is not enough to gain a degree of precision which a person reading in good faith can
understand, but it is necessary to attain if possible to a degree of precision which a person reading
in bad faith cannot misunderstand”

-Sir James Fitziames Stephen in his Dictum in Royal Talkies, Hyderabad v. E.S.I.C

Legal Drafting is a skill that is sine qua non to Legal Practice. A Legal document, well drafted not
only makes a hassle free arrangement of rights and liabilities of parties but also serves the larger
purpose of Justice by ensuring the utmost level of transparency, accountability and righteousness.
Thus, Drafting of Pleadings invariably is a part of the professional conduct and standard which an
advocate needs to maintain in his practice. However, the standards that are actually witnessed in
the Pleadings at the various levels of Indian Courts is regretful. Even concerning is the laconic
discourse which aims at highlighting the issue of poor standards in legal drafting despite
indications from all spheres of courts and other system lapses in the smooth functioning of the
wheels of Justice system.

This report is a humble effort to set that discourse in place and to highlight through a brief
empirical research the reasons contributing to the poor standards of pleadings drafting in India at
the lower levels of court. The report after analyzing various aspects on the subject makes a special
emphasis to unprofessional activities that are triggered largely by the reason of poor standards of
pleadings. Finally suggesting are also advanced at the end with the conclusion that the right
discourse, awareness and effort can make the seemingly small issue make a great change in the
justice system in India.

Keywords: Drafting, Pleadings, Standards, Unprofessional, Concerns.

8|Page
 INTRODUCTION

A Lawyer’s Career is complex and all encompassing. Advocates are expected to be a jack of all
trades who shall be a go to person for any complexity that may occur in smooth running life. For
being able to afford such services a lawyer has to be well versed with a whole bunch of legislations
ranging from Constitution to Criminal, Civil and almost laws regulating all spheres of human life.
However a legal dispute is more than just a statutory interplay, but a host of other skills come into
play. One such activity is Legal Drafting often called Pleadings.

Prior to any dispute be adjusted or decided, it is necessary to determine the material points at issue
between the disputants or parties. This may be, and is done in several ways. The simplest is a
process of direct questioning of the parties by a neutral, or an arbitrator or judge. Another method
incorporates the exchange of written statements prior to a direct hearing of the parties. These
written submissions are generally a part of Pleadings. The Pleadings therefore serve dual purpose-
Primary purpose of acquainting the court and secondly, the parties with the facts in dispute. 1

A Committee of the American Bar Association classified the main purposes purported to be
achieved by pleadings are as follows:
1. to serve as a formal basis for the judgment to be entered;
2. to separate and sift the issues of fact from questions of' law;
3. to give the litigants the advantage of the plea of res judicata if they are being harassed;
4. to notify the parties of the claims, and defenses of their adversaries2.'

Pleading should perform only the function of aiding in the enforcement of and facilitating
substantive legal relations. It is ought not to limit the operation of the general law which defines
rights and duties, privileges and powers and liabilities of individuals, but should aid in the
enforcement of such relations by reasonable means. It is a means to an end, not an end in itself, as
often propounded by jurists- the handmaid rather than the mistress of justice.3

It is safe to say that Pleading rules play a filtering, or a gate-keeping, role in this context. From this
gate-keeping perspective, one can also imagine many justifications for heightening pleading

1
Charles E. Clark., History, Systems And Functions Of Pleading, Yale Law School
2
35 A. B. A. Rep. 614, 638, 639 (1910), (Prepared By Dean Roscoe Pound And Approved By The Committee)
3
Per Collins, M. R., In Re Coles, [1907] 1 K. B. 4
9|Page
standards—the high costs of discovery and the desire to reduce heavy caseloads, inter alia, but a
fundamental assumption made by those who support stricter pleading standards is that merit
correlates with the factual detail offered by a claimant of notice pleading combined with the high
costs of discovery and litigation forces defendants to settle meritless lawsuits rather than defend
against them in courts.4

Among other host of things, major objective of Pleadings is narrowing the issues in dispute,
developing the facts underlying the dispute, filtering out meritless claims or defenses, and
providing notice to the disputants and to the court about the nature of the claims or defenses to be
pleaded before it. Each of these functions has its own importance within an adjudicative system
aimed at producing justice efficiently. Under the modern civil procedure system, pleadings serve at
least two functions, i.e. to provide notice to disputants, to the courts, and to the public about the
nature of the claims or defenses brought before the court. Pleadings also shape the way that
disputants would conceive to settle the problem or problems at hand in a particular case. 5

Now that we have understood the various objectives and functions for which pleadings are mad it is
precursory to delve into the deeper and underlying aspects of it. The sine qua non to preparing a
Pleading which actually has the potential to serve its laudatory purpose is the skill of Legal
Drafting. Legal Drafting is a skill upon which the trajectory and the outcome of a case largely
depend. Thus it becomes imperative to discuss the standards of legal drafting in this light.
However, before diving into the standards and the analysis of the various aspects associated to
Legal Drafting, one must first get a brief outlook of what is legal drafting, how did it originate, how
did it evolve to the current state and what is the future of drafting Pleadings. All of this shall give a
overview of the standard of Legal drafting and its trends since its inception.

4
Alexander A. Reinert, The Costs Of Heightened Pleading, Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 86:119
5
Moffitt, Michael, "Pleadings In The Age Of Settlement," Indiana Law Journal: Vol. 80 : Iss. 3 , Article 3, (2005).
10 | P a g e
 LEGAL DRAFTING

There are two main kinds of Pleading, known as the Common Law or Civil pleading and the other
is the one practiced under some code. While a number of jurisdictions have seen fit to combine
some features of both these systems, the usual practice is the same. The system of pleading used
under the Common Law, of course, claims England as its place of origin, while the Code based
pleadings claim State of New York as the mother of the code. It must however not be lost sight of
that Justinian and other early legal celebrities of Rome and France have put together codes that are
as ancient, or else existed contemporaneously with the Common Law'.6

History of Pleadings:
Common Law Pleadings:
The system of pleadings developed in the English courts of common law after the Norman
Conquests and applied in legal actions until the pleading reforms of the middle and the latter part of
the nineteenth century. These pleadings are commonly called “common law pleading”.

It developed as a more or less gradual process; the beginnings of most of the common law actions
cannot be stated with absolute precision for the lack of ancient records in this regard. However, by
the time of Edward I it had become a science to be formulated and cultivated. From that time until
the time of the reforms of the nineteenth century, this “science of special pleading” was of the
utmost importance and among its various proponents is included the great legal names of all but the
most recent English law.7

Code Pleadings:
Code pleading is the term generally applied to the reformed system of pleading proposed by the
New York Code of 1848 and now in force in around thirty American jurisdictions8. This system in
itself was developed from the former systems and in many respects continues various details and
parts of them, it is necessary to consider the antecedents of code pleading in the other systems. This
is, for the sake brevity and for our discussion, done briefly and in broad outline only. 9

6
Mason, Charles Bliven, "Pleadings Their History- Comparison Of The Common Law And Code Systems
Technicalities Of The Code", Historical Theses And Dissertations Collection. Paper 45, (1895).
7
Charles E. Clark., History, Systems And Functions Of Pleading, Yale Law School.
8
Id.
9
Id.
11 | P a g e
Roman Pleadings:
It is usual to consider the history of Civil Procedure in ancient Rome as dividing into three broad
periods.
1. The First being that of- The “legis action” procedure, which lasted through the early days of
the Republic;
2. the second, the period of the formal procedure, which covered the later days of the Republic
and the early days of the Empire; and
3. Third is that of the libellary procedure, comprised the latter days of the Empire.10

Equity Pleadings:
This system of pleading developed in the English courts of chancery and likewise applied in the
courts of equity, and is thus termed as equity pleading. The equity courts developed from the
exercise by the king of his royal prerogative through his Chancellor to do justice where the courts
failed to do so. Since the first Chancellors were churchmen, they followed the ecclesiastical law. In
this context, the equity pleading goes back through the canon law to the later period of the Roman
law, although the connection is not so direct as to have been completely controlling but we do find
a general similarity between the English equity system and the Roman libellary procedure in the
absence of a separate body for the trial of facts and hence the absence of emphasis upon the
formation of an issue.11

Evolution of Pleading Standards:

The New York Code of 1848.
In New York the movement for reform, which had been making some real strides in England,
became especially strong just prior to the middle of the nineteenth century. By a new constitution,
adopted in the state in 1846, the court of chancery was abolished, and there was created in its place
a court having general jurisdiction in law and equity. Further, the next legislature was directed to
provide for the appointment of three commissioners -to revise, reform, simplify and abridge the
practice and pleadings of courts of record of the state. 12

The system inaugurated by the New York Code of 1848 was a watershed for code based pleading in
the United States as a similar code was then adopted in Missouri in 1849, in California in 1850, in
10
Id.
11
Id.
12
Supra Note 1.
12 | P a g e
Kentucky, Iowa and Minnesota in 1851.13 However now, the whole of United States pleadings are
code based. The Pleading Judgments in the last two decades however has largely changed the
landscape of the Code Pleadings in US.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires “a short and plain statement of the claim showing
that the pleader is entitled to relief.” The Supreme Court’s decision in Conley v. Gibson14 had a
long settled principle and construction of the rule, with the Court famously stating that a complaint
must merely “give the defendant fair notice of what the claim is and the grounds upon which it
rests.” However, U.S. Supreme Court in Twombly 15 rejected this construction as an inaccurate
gloss on the rule, and that in the wake of Gibson decision, there was some uncertainty regarding the
level of scrutiny that must be given to federal pleadings. This was shortly followed by the
controversial Iqbal Case.16

Plausibility Pleading Standard:

The Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly17 adopted a “plausibility” pleading standard
in reviewing the sufficiency of an antitrust complaint, overruling in part its previous Conley v.
Gibson,18 the 1957 case that ratified the “notice” pleading regime adopted by the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure. The Court articulated a new “plausibility” pleading standard under Rule 8(a) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Under the Court’s plausibility standard, the allegations in a
plaintiff’s complaint must be both “non-conclusory and plausible”—i.e., they must not only be
consistent with the defendant’s liability, but must go beyond mere consistency to supplant
alternative explanations for challenged conduct that would result in non-liability on the part of the
defendants.19

The Iqbal Pleading Standard:

In Ashcroft v. Iqbal20, the U.S. Supreme Court went a step ahead and extended Twombly to all civil
actions and applied an even more rigorous standard to a civil rights action filed against high-level
federal officials. The end result is a pleading standard that heightens attention to “conclusory”

13
Hepburn, Op. Cit. 88, 89
14
355 U.S. 41 (1957).
15
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007).
16
Smith, Douglas Geoffrey, The Evolution Of A New Pleading Standard: Ashcroft V. Iqbal (August 28, 2009). Oregon
Law Review, Vol. 88, No. 44, 2009, Available At Ssrn: Https://Ssrn.Com/Abstract=146384.
17
550 U.S. 544 (2007).
18
355 U.S. 41 (1957).
19
Supra Note 16.
20
129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009).
13 | P a g e
pleading, treats state of mind allegations in a manner at odds with prior precedents set by its own
self, and encourages lower courts to apply their own intuitions to decide whether a plaintiff’s legal
claims and allegations are sufficient to proceed to discovery.21 Well, though this in itself opens up
to a separate debate of Judicial discretion, administrative natural rights and a host of other aspects, I
shall restrain myself from delving into it for the purpose of our discussion on Standards of Legal
Drafting.

Iqbal decision superseded Twombly in giving teeth to the notice pleading standard in Rule 8(a).
This time, the Court focused on the requirement under Rule 8(a) that allegations be “non-
conclusory.” In doing so, it articulated a theory that invites even greater judicial scrutiny at the
pleading stage. In discussing this prong of the analysis, the majority, hearing the matter, made clear
that conclusory allegations are not entitled to the normal assumption of truth according factual
allegations in deciding a motion to dismiss and that, in order to avoid the conclusory label, a
plaintiff must plead specific facts that support plaintiff’s more general allegations. Simply put,
asserting ultimate conclusions that would corroborate that liability is not enough. Iqbal thus
represents a further raising of the standards plaintiffs must meet before they are allowed to proceed
with discovery. In Twombly as well as the Iqbal, the Court reiterated that its articulation of the
pleading standard was dictated by the text of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.22

Iqbal definitively answered that question, making clear that the Court understood the Federal Rules
to require a high level of judicial scrutiny at the pleading stage in order to screen out cases in which
plaintiffs had simply failed to plead the material and necessary facts to establish a claim. Thus the
court seemed to prefer the gate-keeping role over other objectives of the Pleadings in its
interpretation. Even a few critics of the Iqbal/Twombly claiming it to have heightened pleading
standard, tend to assume that there is a rational motivation for raising pleading standards, in order
to better filter out meritless suits, even if they disagree with it for other reasons23.

21
129 S. CT. 1937 (2009).
22
Smith, Douglas Geoffrey, The Evolution Of A New Pleading Standard: Ashcroft V. Iqbal (August 28, 2009), Oregon
Law Review, Vol. 88, No. 44, 2009, Available At Ssrn: Https://Ssrn.Com/Abstract=146384.
23
Alexander A. Reinert, The Costs Of Heightened Pleading, Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 86:119.
14 | P a g e
 STANDARDS OF LEGAL DRAFTING AT VARIOUS LEVELS OF INDIAN COURTS

The international landscape of Legal Drafting is somewhat understood at the cursory glance we had
above over the Common Law and Code based Pleadings. Standards set in by the U.S federal code
of Civil Procedure and as interpreted by the Twobly and Iqbal case by the U.S. Supreme Court
further elucidates the elevated standards of Legal Drafting. However while talking about the Indian
Courts various other considerations has to be made.

The method of arriving at an issue by alternate allegations has been a common practice in many
civilized countries from earliest times. The art of pleadings apparently is as ancient as any portion
of the procedural laws. In ancient India, it certainly existed but differed largely from that in the
present form. The art of pleading is also traceable substantially the same in form as in England in
the days of Henry II. It is already seen that the art of arriving at an issue was not only practiced
during the reign of Edward II, but had been practiced even before. For an issue had not been only
the constant effect, but the professed aim and the object of pleading.

At its inception, the pleadings were largely oral. The parties actually appeared in person in open
Court and oral moot took place in the presence of the judges. These oral pleading were conducted
either by the party himself or by a person designated who was an eloquent orator and well versed in
religious dictates (Dharma, Sastras or Quran), whom people generally called Pandits and Maulvis
in ancient and medieval India. In English countries such person was called narrator and advocates
before the adoption of this present lawyer’s institution. The Pandits, Maulvis and narrators used to
aid Kings and Judges in the administration of justice and adjudication in those days. 24

While it was affordable to take up a documentary or doctrinal mode of research while

understanding the international standards of Legal Drafting especially in light of the two landmark
Pleadings Judgments, Indian jurisprudence largely lacks any authoritative discussion on inter alia,
Standards of Legal Drafting. It is therefore preferable to take up an empirical analysis of the various
aspects pertaining to Pleadings in Indian Courts. For the purpose of understanding the intricate
aspects of Legal Drafting its standards and the issues emanating out of it an empirical research has
been taken up with data collected from the data subjects with relatively informed background

24
Lb 502 Drafting, Pleadings, Full Material, Available At:
Http://Lawfaculty.Du.Ac.In/Files/Course_Material/Old_Course_Material/Lb%20502%20drafting,%20pleadings,%20fu
ll%20material%20.Pdf
15 | P a g e
comprising of Law Students, Law Professionals and Para-Legals
Para Legals who have responded over certain
crucial aspects of the subject. We shall now resort to the same to understand these aspects.

Disparity in Standards of Legal Drafting:

Out of a set of questions projected to the research participants, one was pertaining with the disparity
of Legal Drafting across the hierarchy of Courts in India. Considering the diverse and huge sub-
sub
continent India is, the Court Hierarchy in India is all the more diverse. While the utmost care and
caution goes in while considering a Caveat in the Apex Court, the Supreme Court of India, a pitiful
callousness is generally witnessed at the court of instance or trial court level. Refer to the Pi
Pi-Chart
below where a staggering 64.4% of research participants agree that there is a “concerning disparity”
at the various levels of Indian Courts whereas
whereas 33.7% holds that the disparity is “Workable”.

Source: Field Research on Legal Drafting, Draft Panacea

The finding above gives out a clear fact that around 98.1% of the research participants find the
disparity in standards of Legal Drafting aat the Indian Courts concerning. It is however imperative to
understand here what the distinction between a concerning and workable disparity is. While
concerning disparity is a grave and serious concern which calls for an immediate redress, a
workable concern
ern may find such redress coming in with time. Regardless of the distinction this
indeed is the reality of the Indian Court system.

16 | P a g e
Regardless of the paucity of research in the field, the Courts in India have on multiple occasions
expressed their concern on Legal Drafting and its standards.25 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Lord William of
the Calcutta High Court had strongly emphasized upon the need of careful study of the art of
pleading and condemned the obscure pleading which were shocking and were filed “even in
Calcutta High Court”, though the same is a common place occurrence in lower courts. He noted
further that- “It is, therefore, the duty of every advocate to take extreme care in drafting of his
pleadings. There is no force in saying that the pleading in this country are not to be strictly
construed. Had this been the object of the law of pleading the framers of the Code of Civil
Procedure would not have laid down the rules of Civil Pleadings”26.
(Emphasis Supplied)

A select committee of eminent lawyers having knowledge of Indian conditions was appointed to
frame the present Code of Civil Procedure which has been amended and redrafted in 1976. Order 6,
7 and 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure are very important from the point of view of drafting of
pleading in the Supreme Court, High Courts till the Mofussil Courts. Appendix A to the Code of
Civil Procedure contains some model form of pleadings which are useful and aids in a template
based drafting. Unfortunately these forms are seldom consulted by the lower court pleaders and the
reason being that the pleadings are being drafted by Para-Legals, who are not trained in this
direction and do not have expert legal knowledge27.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Virender Nath Gautam Vs Satpal Singh & Ors 28 has
outlined that- “All 'material facts' must be pleaded by the party in support of the case set up by him.
Since the object and purpose is to enable the opposite party to know the case he has to meet with, in
the absence of pleading, a party cannot be allowed to lead evidence. Failure to state even a single
material fact, hence, will entail dismissal of the suit or petition. Particulars, on the other hand, are
the details of the case which is in the nature of evidence a party would be leading at the time of
trial”.29

25
Dictum of Sir James Fitziames Stephen in Royal Talkies, Hyderabad And Ors. V. ESIC , AIR 1978 SC 1478.
26
Lb 502 Drafting, Pleadings, Full Material, Available At:
http://lawfaculty.du.ac.in/files/course_material/old_course_material/lb%20502%20drafting,%20pleadings,%20full%20
material%20.pdf
27
Id.
28
(2007) 3 SCC 617.
29
Virender Nath Gautam Vs Satpal Singh & Ors, (2007) 3 SCC 617.
17 | P a g e
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has captured the essence of Legal Drafting Standards and its
importance in the case of Bijlee Karmachari Sangh, M.P. And Ors. Vs. M.P. Electricity Board,
Jabalpur And Ors., where while interpreting the term 'employee' the court observed that- “It is not
merely a legalistic interpretation of the term, but also a realistic approach, keeping in view the
concept and context of social justice, as enshrined in our Constitution.30
The MP High Court further cited the Supreme Court’s definition of 'employee' under the
Employees State Insurance Act, in Royal Talkies, Hyderabad v. E.S.I31. where the court had said-
“This reminds us of the well-known dictum of Sir James Fitziames Stephen "that in drafting it is not
enough to gain a degree of precision which a person reading in good faith can understand, but it is
necessary to attain if possible to a degree of precision which a person reading in bad faith cannot
misunderstand32.”

It is important to understand the regulatory mechanism in place to maintain the standards of Legal
Drafting at the Supreme Court of India which will further clear the picture at the lowest level.
Section 2(xx) “Practice of law” means and includes (a) practising before the Court, Tribunal,
Authority, Regulator, Administrative Body or Officer and any Quasi Judicial and Administrative
Body, (b) giving legal advice either individually or from a law firm either orally or in writing, (c)
giving legal advice to any government, international body or representing any international dispute
resolution bodies including International Court of Justice, (d) engaged in Legal Drafting and
participating in any Legal Proceedings and (e) representing in Arbitration Proceedings or any other
ADR approved by law.33

ORDER VIII of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 mentions the requirements a Caveat or even a mere
document has to comply with while filing. The Rule mentions as below:
“I. The officers of the Court shall not receive any pleading, petition, affidavit or other
document, except original exhibits and certified copies of public documents, unless it is
fairly and legibly written, type-written or lithographed in double-line spacing, on one side
of standard petition paper, demy-foolscap size, or of the size of 29.7 cm x 21 cm, or paper
which is ordinarily used in the High Courts for the purpose. Copies filed for the use of the
courts shall be neat and legible, and shall be certified to be true copies by the advocate-on-
record, or by in person, as the case may be.”
30
Bijlee Karmachari Sangh, M.P. And Ors. Vs. M.P. Electricity Board, Jabalpur And Ors, MANU/MP/0293/1985.
31
AIR 1978 SC 1478.
32
Royal Talkies, Hyderabad And Ors. V. Esic , AIR 1978 SC 1478.
33
Part –IV, Rules Of Legal Education, Bar Council Of India Rules.
18 | P a g e
ORDER XXIX of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 reads “Pleadings Generally” which deals with
the standards with which a legal practitioner filing a case has to comply in the pleadings. Further
ORDER XXVIII of the 2013 Rules under Rule 3 of Written Statement, Set-Off And Counter-Claim
lays:
“3. Each allegation of fact in the plaint, if not denied specifically or by necessary implication, or
not expressly stated to be not admitted in the pleading of the defendant, shall be taken to be
admitted, but the Court may in its discretion require any fact so admitted to be proved otherwise
than by such admission”

The above rules clearly gives out the picture that the standard for drafting at the apex court is fairly
and reasonably high. However its is not that no such rules of pleadings are laid for lower court
pleadings. The Code of Civil Procedure as well as the Criminal Procedure Code lays down the rules
and contains a whole set of guided templates which may be referred to for drafting. Them the
question is what is the reason for such a disparity. Is there a check mechanism in place at the apex
court level which is significantly infructuous at the lowest level?

Though the Supreme Court of India was inaugurated on 28th January 1950, the rules and procedure
as applicable to the Federal Court were promulgated a long time thereafter. Article 145(1) of the
Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to frame its own rules. In May 1964, the then Chief
Justice of India Mr. Gajendragadkar, constituted a committee of 3 members of the Supreme Court
Bar, namely Shri Narayan Andley, Shri I.N.Shroff, and Shri Janardhan Sharma with the Registrar
and the Dy. Registrar assisted this Committee. The Committee drafted the revised rules and
submitted them to the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India.

Thereafter, the Chief Justice of India constituted a sub-committee of 5 judges consisting of Justice
Subba Rao, Justice Wanchoo, Justice Hidyatullah, Justice J.C.Shah and Justice Sikri. The
Committee examined the draft rules and considered further suggestions received from the members
of the Bar. Thereafter the full court finalised the rules and these rules received the sanction of the
President of India on 20th December 1965. Under these rules the concept of the “Advocates-on-
Record” came to be formalized.34
Section 2(b) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 defines “Advocate on Record” as:

34
Supreme Court Rules, 2013.
19 | P a g e
“advocate-on-record means an advocate who is entitled under these rules to act as well as to plead
for a party in the Court;”

The Supreme Court Rules mention the following functions with regards to an AOR under Rule 7:
7. (a) An advocate-on-record shall, on his filing a memorandum of appearance on behalf of a party
accompanied by a vaka\atnama duly executed by the party, be entitled-
(i) To act as well as to plead for the party in the matter and to conduct and prosecute before the
Court all proceedings that may be taken in respect of the said matter or any application connected
with the same or any decree or order passed therein including proceedings in taxation and
applications for review; and
(ii) to deposit and receive money on behalf of the said party.
(b) (i) Where the vakalatnama is executed in the presence of the Advocate-on-Record, he shall
certify that it was executed in his presence.
(ii) Where the Advocate-on-Record merely accepts the vakalatnama which is already duly executed
in the presence of a Notary or an advocate, he shall make an endorsement thereon that he has
satisfied himself about the due execution oftlie vakalatnama.
(c) No advocate other than an advocate-on·tecord shall be entitled to file an appeararce or act for a
party in the Court.
(d) Every advocate-on·record shall keep such books of account as may be necessary to show and
distinguish in connection with his practice as an advocate-on-record.
(i) moneys received from or on account of and the moneys paid to or on account of each ofhis
clients; and
(ii) the moneys received and the moneys paid on his own account.
(e) Every advocate-on-record shall, before taxation of the Bill of Costs, file with the Taxing Officer
a Certificate showing the amount of fee paid to him or agreed to be paid to him by his client

Now, a look to the lower court drafting is warranted after the elaborate mechanism is known for
maintaining the utmost standard of Legal Drafting and compliance to rules at the apex court.

The Bombay High Court in the case of P. Vs. P. And R35 has remarked that:

35
MANU/MH/0234/1982.
20 | P a g e
“Though, there is substance in the attack of Mr. Kenia, I do not propose to attach too much
importance to the manner in which the petition is drafted as in my view, the petition contains
exaggerated allegations and allegations are mentioned out of sequence. Though, I may therefore,
treat the petition a little leniently, it must to some extent have an effect on appreciating the evidence
of the petitioner.36”

In Ram Prasad Banerjee Vs. Nitikona Choudhury And Ors. 37 the Guwahati High Court has
clearly highlighted the Pleadings error and expressed its concern over it:
“On a dispassionate reading of the entire amendment petition, it would appear that the case
projected by the petitioner was that he had given necessary instructions and documents to his
counsel, who drafted the written statement and the non-disclosure of materials and documents in
written statement came to light only after new set of counsels were engaged. It is projected that
after new net of counsels were engaged, they informed the petitioner that detailed reply to
paragraphs 21, 23, 25 and 27 were not given and documents relating to Schedule-5 and 6
properties were not filed. ………. it would be a case where the ingredients of "due diligence"
was totally absent at the time of filing of the written statement and lack of due diligence even
continued thereafter till the filing of the petition for amendment. Therefore, this Court is
constrained to hold that in the absence of any statement that the petitioner does not know to read
and write, the petitioner had signed the written statement only after being satisfied with its contents
and, as such, the petitioner must take the responsibility of the contents of the written statement and
the petitioner would not be permitted to lay all blame on his counsel, without disclosing even the
name of the counsel to whom necessary instructions and documents allegedly have been given. 38.

Patna High Court in Siyaram Roy Vs. The State Of Bihar And Ors 39 barred the party to take
advantage of non legal expertice of the Legal Drafting skills of the opponent “-A government
servant is not expected to be proficient in legal drafting and an inquiry officer or a disciplinary
authority cannot make absence of exact expression in reply of a delinquent an excuse for not
complying with the mandatory requirements of law in conformity with principles of natural
justice.40”

36
P. Vs. P. And R., MANU/MH/0234/1982.
37
MANU/GH/0964/2017.
38
Ram Prasad Banerjee Vs. Nitikona Choudhury And Ors., MANU/GH/0964/2017.
39
MANU/BH/0475/2019.
40
Siyaram Roy Vs. The State Of Bihar And Ors. (27.03.2019 - Patnahc) : Manu/Bh/0475/2019.
21 | P a g e
In another Bombay High Court Case 41 has highlighted the non expectation of legal drafting
expertise from a complainant- “The
The complainant cannot be expected to be expert in legal drafting.
The complaint is not expected to be an encyclopedia to conform to geometric or arithmetic
precision and accuracy. A complaint is not expected to be a printed book, rather it has to be like a
lay person's manuscript42.”

The above string of cases only amplifies the observation that was recorded in the empirical findings
upon the question of the degree of concern on Poor Legal Drafting Standards. The empirical
research indicate that around 77.9% of the participants believe that there exists a very high level of
concern on the poor level of legal drafting
d and pleadings in the Indian Courts.

Source: Field Research on Legal Drafting, Draft Panacea

While there is a miniscule percentage of participants who believe that the concerns are moderate,
the higher levels of concern is corroborated by the
the catena of case laws where the courts have clearly
highlighted the various concerns pertaining to pleadings and its standards.

In Qudrat Ullah Vs. Municipal Board, Bareilly43 the Supreme Court of India clearly expressed its
concerns on poor Pleadings Standards
ndards in following terms:

41
Gurmelsing Gajesing Nehra And Ors. Vs. State Of Maharashtra And Ors., Manu/Mh/1989/2011
42
Id.
43
MANU/SC/0418/1973.
22 | P a g e
“The relevant dispute lies in a narrow compass, and can be resolved by a close look at the terms of
Ex. '1' (substantially repeated in Ex. '4') and by applying settled rules which tell off a lease from a
licence when the deed is ambiguous. It is unfortunate that legal drafting by the respondent's
lawmen has left the key documents in a blurred state, so much so, the trial Judge and the learned
judges in appeal have had to diverge in their conclusions, and before us long arguments have
been hopefully addressed to help us designate the contract with certitude a lease or license.44”

These changes in the rules of pleading should be accompanied by changes in the organization of the
courts and in other parts of the practice system. It seems that the judges will not exercise their rule-
making function without some directing head, and perhaps not even then without impetus given by
some social agency in touch with and responsive to political needs." Thus the system so generally
urged to secure administrative efficiency in the courts of a unified court of many judges under the
direction of a presiding judge appears also necessary in connection with the suggested pleading
reforms.45

In Commissioner of Income Tax Bombay City II v. Shanti K Maheswari 46 Tendolkar J observes

that in respect of the said agreement a cynic will say that the language has been employed to
conceal the thoughts of its authors This Court has on numerous occasions commented on the
manner in which legal drafting is being done These comments have however fallen on deaf
ears. In construing such a document, we can only do our best the result may not be entirely
satisfactory.47

44
Qudrat Ullah Vs. Municipal Board, Bareilly, MANU/SC/0418/1973
45
Alexander A. Reinert, The Costs Of Heightened Pleading, Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 86:119
46
AIR1958BOM478
47
Income Tax Officer, 'A' Ward, Companies District I, Calcutta Vs. State Bank Of India, MANU/WB/0087/1968
23 | P a g e
 IMPACT OF LEGAL DRAFTING ON JUSTICE SYSTEM:

Access to justice is a cornerstone principle of our democracy. Vital to that principle is our civil
justice system and the ease with which those who have been aggrieved are able to seek relief.48
According to a report49 titled “The Costs Of Heightened Pleading” it has been highlighted that the
cases that are most vulnerable to dismissal for having thin pleadings are ones that rely on state of
mind allegations, which are the heart of most civil rights and private discrimination claims. Indeed,
if the detail of pleadings is more a reflection of information availability than merit, cases in which
state of mind plays a large role or in which there are large information asymmetries, such as civil
rights, constitutional, and employment discrimination cases, are most likely to be vulnerable to
accusations of thin pleading.50

As in Twombly, the Court cited the dangers of allowing plaintiffs with weak claims to proceed with
discovery, given the burdens the process frequently places on defendants. Allowing such cases to
proceed not only is inefficient and costly, but may result in settlements that are not warranted by
the merits. Iqbal thus represents a logical progression in the march toward greater judicial scrutiny
at the outset of the litigation to avoid the inefficiencies and burdens that may be imposed on
defendants later in the process.51

The Court’s decisions, which strengthen and define the standards under Rule 8(a) effectively target
those claims with little or no merit while not disadvantaging those with merit. In this regard, the
Court’s decisions are likely to have a salient effect. Weak and unsupported claims will be
discouraged. Plaintiffs will have an incentive to include factual allegations to support their legal
claims in the body of their complaint.52

48
A. B. Spencer, Understanding Pleading Doctrine, 108 Mich. L. Rev. 1 (2009). Available At:
https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol108/iss1/1
49
Alexander A. Reinert, The Costs Of Heightened Pleading, Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 86:119
50
Id.
51
Smith, Douglas Geoffrey, The Evolution Of A New Pleading Standard: Ashcroft V. Iqbal (August 28, 2009). Oregon
Law Review, Vol. 88, No. 44, 2009, Available At ssrn: https://ssrn.com/abstract=146384.
52
Id.
24 | P a g e
In Ramos-Barrientos v. Bland53,
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia ordered the plaintiffs to
amend their complaint in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) “short and plain
statement” requirement. The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint, alleging that it failed to
meet the requirements of F.R. Civ.P 8(a) because, in addition to being 68 pages long, it contained
needless cross-referencing, “plus incoherence, plus circular and convoluted sentence structure.”
The court agreed with the assessment. Although it denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss, the
court explained that the “short and plain statement” requirement is not met when the complaint is
composed of “page-long sentences permeated with broken clauses and cross-references.” The court
stated that “enough paragraphs and sentences are needlessly verbose, tangled, fractured, and
repetitive as to require corrective action.54”

The Court’s recent pleadings decisions recognize that, as the costs of litigation increase and the
scope of discovery expands, the need for more stringent pleading standards increases. It is neither
efficient nor fair to allow claims of dubious merit to proceed when doing so may lead to settlements
that are not based on the underlying merits, but rather the potential costs associated with defending
a lawsuit in our modern civil justice system.55

The Supreme Court has sent a strong signal with these twin decisions that plaintiffs must plead
sufficient factual detail such that a logically coherent theory emerges that is more than merely
“consistent with” the defendant’s liability.56

In India, however the impact is quite different and diverse in its nature, owing to its unique
challenges and reasons for poor standards of Pleadings. The Empirical research reveals that the
single largest impact that the poor standards of Pleadings impacts is that to trigger
unprofessionalism and malpractices in Legal Practice. 67.3% of the participants hold that poor
pleadings affect the ethics and professionalism among practitioners. This ethical concern is
discussed at large in the later part dedicated to this discussion.

53
2008 WL 474426.
54
A. B. Spencer, Understanding Pleading Doctrine, 108 Mich. L. Rev. 1 (2009). Available At:
https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol108/iss1/1
55
Smith, Douglas Geoffrey, The Evolution Of A New Pleading Standard: Ashcroft V. Iqbal, August 28, 2009.
56
Id.
25 | P a g e
 Source: Field Research on Legal Drafting, Draft Panacea

Another major impact poor pleading standards has a potential to Adversely affect the access to
justice of the parties as is believed by 58.7% of the participants. While 53.8% feels that Poor
standards of pleading Supplement pendency and delay in cases. These figures are no less backed by
the court observations in plethora of cases.

Affects Rights of the Parties:

Delhi High Court in Delhi Express Travels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. International Air Transport Association
And Ors 57 observed while dealing with an arbitration clause that ““it
it was further held that the
agreement need not be in any particular form and the use or absence of the word arbitration,
arbitrator or arbitrators or reference is immaterial. It was further held that when the intention of
the parties is to seek arbitrationn in case of any further disputes is clear, then inartistic drafting of
arbitration clause cannot be taken advantage of by any party
party.. The Arbitration Agreement in the
present case though not in the normal/traditional form is nevertheless found to indicate an
intention of the parties to arbitrate. The reason for the inartistic language is apparent. The
Arbitration Agreement is in the form of Resolutions passed in the Passenger Agency Conference of
the Managers of Airlines. The said managers are not used to aastute
stute legal drafting and have in their

57
Manu/De/0739/2009
26 | P a g e
own commercial way provided for Dispute Resolution Mechanism by experts in the field of travel
as also for arbitration.58”

The Supreme Court in Delta International Ltd 59

. relied upon by the counsel for the
respondents/plaintiffs/landlords has held that “where the landlord alleges that the tenant has sublet
the premises and the tenant in support of his defense sets up a plea of a mere licensee and relies
upon a deed entered into inter se between himself and the alleged licensee, the landlord who is not
a party to the deed is not bound by what emanates from the construction of the deed; and it is the
duty of the Court to remove/lift the mask/veil and determine the true intention behind a facade of
a self-serving conveniently drafted instrument60.”

In The State Of Karnataka And Ors. Vs. Ranganatha Reddy And Ors the court observed the
challenges in Pleadings drafting in following words: “53. In a country where the people are, by and
large, illiterate, where a social revolution is being pushed through by enormous volume and variety
of legislation and where new economic adventures requiring un orthodox jural techniques are
necessitous, if legal drafting is to be equal to the challenge of change, a radicalisation of its
methodology and philosophy and an ability for the legislative manpower to express themselves in
streamlined, simple, project-oriented fashion is essential61.”

In Income Tax Officer, 'A' Ward, Companies District I, Calcutta And Ors. Vs. State Bank Of India
the court was called upon to interpret the provision of Articles IV, V and VI of an Agreement. The
Court observed that “The language of the Agreement is confused, inapt and extremely difficult to
decipher.”

Causes Delay and Pendency:

Senior Advocate, Arun Mohan, author of the book titled “Justice, Courts, and delays” tells in his
book that almost 80% of the application for the amendment is filed with the sole objective of
delaying the proceedings.

58
Delhi Express Travels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. International Air Transport Association And Ors, MANU/DE/0739/2009.
59
MANU/SC/0258/1999.
60
Delta International Limited Vs. Shyam Sundar Ganeriwalla & Another, MANU/SC/0258/1999.
61
The State Of Karnataka And Ors. Vs. Ranganatha Reddy And Ors., MANU/SC/0062/1977.
27 | P a g e
NJDG Pendency Dashboard Data:62
9844757 -Total Civil Cases
26260593 -Total Criminal Cases
36105350 –Total Cases

Frequent amendment applications:

Even though Judge-citizen ratio and vacancies of the Judges, The Law Commission in its 254th
report mentions the establishment of additional courts for speedy disposal of cases, Frequent
adjournments: Despite the fact that the Civil Procedure Code under Order XVII, Rule 1, Huge
number of appeals, Non-compliance with the provisions of Section 89, Non-appearance of the
parties are the very common reasons cited for the delay. This report emphasizes that these may be
the superficial reasons for delay and pendency, however they themselves are an effect of poor
pleadings and thus contributing largely to the delay and pendency at all levels of the court.

Chander Kanta Bansal Vs. Rajinder Singh Anand 63 , has noted the object and purpose of
amendment made in 2002. In Para 13, following has been held:-
“13. The entire object of the said amendment is to stall filing of applications for amend- ing a
pleading subsequent to the commencement of trial, to avoid surprises and the parties had sufficient
knowledge of the other’s case. It also helps in checking the delays in filing the applications. Once,
the trial commences on the known pleas, it will be very difficult for any side to reconcile. In spite of
the same, an exception is made in the newly inserted proviso where it is shown that in spite of due
diligence, he could not raise a plea, it is for the court to consider the same. Therefore, it is not a
complete bar nor shuts out enter- taining of any later application. As stated earlier, the reason for
adding proviso is to curtail delay and expedite hearing of cases.”

Supreme Court in the case of Mahila Ramkali Devi & Ors. Vs. Nandram (Dead) through Legal
Representatives & Ors.64, has again reiterated the basic principles which is quoted as below:-
“20. It is well settled that rules of procedure are intended to be a handmaid to the ad- ministration
of justice. A party cannot be re- fused just relief merely because of some mis- take, negligence,
inadvertence or even infraction of rules of procedure. The court always gives relief to amend the
pleading of the party, unless it is satisfied that the party applying was acting mala fide or that by

62
NJDG data, available at: https://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdgnew/?p=main/pend_dashboard
63
(2008) 5 SCC 117.
64
(2015) 13 SCC 132.
28 | P a g e
his blunder he had caused injury to his opponent which cannot be compensated for by an order of
cost.”

In Jai Jai Ram Manohar Lal v. National Building Material Supply 65, the Supreme Court held that
“the power to grant amendment to pleadings is intended to serve the needs of justice and is not
governed by any such narrow or technical limitations.”

Frequent applications for amendments is one reason that directly potrays the reality of Pleadings
and its standards in a court. It is not only used as a delay tactics but the fact that the courts observe
it as an opportunity to condone the minor errors, bears the fact that such error occurs in the first
place due to the poor standards of Legal Drafting that is prime consideration here.

Triggers Unprofessional Behavior:

The unprofessional activities that take place are at the very outset for the reason of poor pleadings.
Often the advocates representing the parties do not turn up at the time of hearing for the failure to
file a motion on time and as per the demands of the concerned court. The intendance accounts to
26.19% of the total delay in Indian Courts. Further this fact is corroborated by the fact that in
5.35% of cases the records itself are waiting to be filed.

This report emphasizes that these may be the superficial effects like delay and pendency, non-
appearance of advocates, non filing of records, amendment applications and host of other activities
all fall under the ambit of unprofessional activities which is primarily for the reason of poor
pleadings. These effects however they themselves are an effect of poor pleadings and thus
contributing largely to the delay and pendency at all levels of the court.

65
1969 AIR 1267.
29 | P a g e
 Securing Presence:- 1941800 (47.73 %)

Unattended:- 1065506 (26.19 %)

Stayed:- 673224 (16.55 %)

Awaiting Record:- 217500 (5.35 % )

Frequent Applications:- 112222 (2.76 % )

Execution:- 43843 (1.08 % )

Bulky Case:- 14134 (0.35 % ) Source: National Judicial Data Grid66

Delhi High Court has marked strong criticism making the unprofessionalism in a case of Pushpa
Sharma Vs. V.V. Gujral And Ors 67 “A wholesome, pragmatic, common sense reading of the
agreement leaves no manner of doubt that the said Agreement can by no stretch of imagination be
said to be in expansion of the business being carried on by the appellant/defendant/tenant in the
said shop. The clear intent of the said Agreement was to allow use of the shop to M/s. Juice Zone
India in consideration of minimum Rs. 40,000/- per month to be paid by them to the
appellant/defendant/tenant. Being of course fully aware of the legal consequences of the
transaction, while drawing up the formal agreement, the same provided that the
appellant/defendant/tenant was to continue in occupation and physical possession of the shop and
the tenor of the agreement was made to show the involvement of the appellant/defendant/tenant in
the business to be carried by M/s. Juice Zone India in the said shop. However this Court is not to
be fooled by such attempts and mere clever legal drafting of such transactions cannot be allowed
to come in the way of consequences which follow in law from the tenants entering into such
transactions.”

66
https://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdgnew/?p=main/pend_dashboard
67
MANU/DE/0308/2014.
30 | P a g e
 ISSUES IN LEGAL DRAFTING DUE TO LOW STANDARD

Though we are historically committed to the policy of requiring the pleadings to determine the
issue, and still continue to a considerable extent in this position, we are gradually learning to expect
less of pleading. The insistence on it seems often not worth the price. The difficulties are
accentuated by lack of sufficiently well-trained lawyers among the members of the bar. It takes
great skill as well as a thorough knowledge to be a good pleader. Many judges naturally will
hesitate to sacrifice the rights of clients because of the pleading mistakes of their attorneys.68

Moreover popular opinion is likely always to take the side of the clients which may show itself in
legislative action as well as in criticism of the judges. We are therefore in a middle position
between the common and the civil law. We still expect something of pleading but are more
disposed to realize that there are difficulties in the way of complete achievement of its ends. Hence
we have our modern so-called liberal attitude towards it. We tend towards the civil law system; we
shall probably not reach it for many generations, if at all. Perhaps, however, the future may devise
some test of the relative values of the two, so that a definite choice may be possible.69

Amendment of Pleadings:
Order 6 Rule 17 CPC postulates amendment of pleadings at any stage of the proceedings. In
Pirgonda Hongonda Patil vs. Kalgonda Shidgonda Patil & Ors 70, which still holds the field, it
was held that all amendments ought to be allowed which satisfy the two conditions:

(a) of not working injustice to the other side, and

(b) of being necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the
parties. Amendments should be refused only where the other party cannot be placed in the same
position as if the pleading had been originally correct, but the amendment would cause him an
injury which could not be compensated in costs.

68
Charles E. Clark., History, Systems And Functions Of Pleading, Yale Law School.
69
Id.
70
AIR 1957 SC 363.
31 | P a g e
Order VI Rule 17 Code Of Civil Procedure holds that:

Amendment of pleadings – The Court may at any stage of the proceedings allow either party to
alter or amend his pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be just, and all such
amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in
controversy between the parties.

Provided that no application for amendment shall be allowed after the trial has commenced, unless
the court comes to the conclusion that in spite of due diligence, the party could not have raised the
matter before the commencement of trial.”71

Hon´ble Supreme Court of India in case Ravajeetu Builders & Developers v/s Narayanaswamy &
Sons & others72 , is pleased to lay down the following guidelines for allowing or rejecting the
application for amendment :
(1) Whether the amendment sought is imperative for proper and effective adjudication of the case?
(2) Whether the application for amendment is bona fide or malafide?
(3) The amendment should not cause such prejudice to the other side which cannot be compensated
adequately in terms of money.
(4) Refusing amendment would in fact lead to injustice or lead to multiple litigation.
(5) Whether the proposed amendment constitutionally or fundamentally changes the nature and
character of the case?
(6) As a general rule, the court should decline amendments, if a fresh suit on the amended claims
would be barred by limitation on the date of application.

Cropper v Smith73
Cropper was well known in the context of permission to appeal. It was raised to try suggest the
general approach that the court should take when dealing with relief from sanctions (see CPR 3.9)
Bowen LJ said,
“Now, I think it is a well established principle that the object of Courts is to decide the rights of the
parties, and not to punish them for mistakes they make in the conduct of their cases by deciding

71
Order VI Rule 17 Code Of Civil Procedure
72
JT 2009(13) SC 366.
73
Cropper V Smith, (1884) 26 CH. D. 700 (CA)
32 | P a g e
otherwise than in accordance with their rights. Speaking for myself, and in conformity with what I
have heard laid down by the other division of the Court of Appeal and by myself as a member of it,
I know of no kind of error or mistake which, if not fraudulent or intended to overreach, the Court
ought not to correct, if it can be done without injustice to the other party. Courts do not exist for the
sake of discipline, but for the sake of deciding matters in controversy, and I do not regard such
amendment as a matter of favour or of grace. Order XXVIII. rule 1, of the Rules of 1883, which
follows previous legislation on the subject, says that,

“All such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real
questions in controversy between the parties.”

It seems to me that as soon as it appears that the way in which a party has framed his case will not
lead to a decision of the real matter in controversy, it is as much a matter of right on his part to have
it corrected, if it can be done without injustice, as anything else in the case is a matter of right…
The question seems to me to be this, Can you by the imposition of any terms place the other side in
as good a position for the purpose of having the question of right determined as they were in at the
time when the mistake of judgment was committed? It does not seem to me material to consider
whether the mistake of judgment was accidental or not, if not intended to overreach. There is no
rule that only slips or accidental errors are to be corrected. The rule says,

“All such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real
questions in controversy.”

I have found in my experience that there is one panacea which heals every sore in litigation, and
that is costs. I have very seldom, if ever, been unfortunate enough to come across an instance,
where a person has made a mistake in his pleadings which has put the other side to such a
disadvantage as that it cannot be cured by the application of that healing medicine. Here I fail even
to see that the Respondents want costs to remedy any grievance, because they have been put to
none. The case has been fought exactly in the same way as it would have been fought if Mr.
Hancock had delivered particulars of objection, and therefore it seems to me that he ought to be
allowed to amend.”

As indicated the revival was very brief. Lord Neuberger said

33 | P a g e
“[the Prince] relied on Cropper v Smith (1884) 26 Ch D 700 , 710, where Bowen LJ said that he
knew of “no kind of error or mistake which, if not fraudulent or inten
intended
ded to overreach, the court
ought not to correct, if it can be done without injustice to the other party”. There are three problems
for the Prince in this connection. The first is that these observations were made in connection with a
proposed amendment to a pleading, ie an attempt by a litigant to do something which he would be
entitled to do, but to do it late; whereas here we are concerned with a party who does not even now
intend to obey a court order. Secondly, as the points made in the last few senten
sentences of the
immediately preceding paragraph of this judgment illustrate, there would be prejudice to the other
parties if the Prince’s current proposal was adopted. Thirdly and even more importantly, the
approach laid down in Cropper v Smith has been overta
overtaken
ken by the CPR.” [ para 27]

Delay:
Arun Mohan, senior lawyer-author
author of the book called “Justice, Courts, and delays” tells in his book
that almost 80% of the application for the amendment is filed with the sole objective of delaying
the proceedings.

Source: Field Research on Legal Drafting, Draft Panacea

Frequent applications for amendments is one reason that directly potrays the reality of Pleadings
and its standards in a court. It is not only used as a delay tactics but the fact that the courts oobserve
it as an opportunity to condone the minor errors, bears the fact that such error occurs in the first
place due to the poor standards of Legal Drafting that is prime consideration here.
34 | P a g e
53.8 % of the participants hold that poor drafting is responsible for delay in proceedings. This view
is even highlighted in the judgment below:

Krishna Iyer J. while delivering the main judgment in the Bangalore Water case 74 , at various
places in his opinion expressed that the attempt made by the Court to impart definite meaning to the
words in the wide definition of 'industry' is only a workable solution until a more precise definition
is provided by the legislature in the para 28:
“28. Law, especially industrial law, which regulates the rights and remedies of the working class,
unfamiliar with the sophistications of definitions and shower of decisions, unable to secure expert
legal opinion, what with poverty pricing them out of the justice market and denying them the
staying power to withstand the multi decked litigative process, de facto denies social justice if legal
drafting' is vagarious, definitions indefinite and court rulings" contradictory. Is it possible, that
the legislative chambers are too preoccupied with other pressing business to listen to court
signals calling for clarification of ambiguous clauses? A careful, prompt amendment of Section
2(j) would have pre-empted this docket explosion before tribunals and courts. This Court,
perhaps more than the legislative and Executive branches, is deeply concerned with law's delays
and to devise a prompt delivery system of social justice.75

In Calcutta Taxi Association And Ors. Vs. D.K. Banerjee And Ors the Calcutta High Court has
realized the importance of simple drafting for advancing the cause of justice. "27. Law, especially
industrial law, which regulates the rights and remedies of the working class, unfamiliar with the
sophistications of definitions and shower of decisions, unable to secure expert legal opinion, what
with poverty pricing them out of the Justice market and denying them the staying power to
withstand the multi-decked litigative process, de facto denies social Justice if legal drafting is
vagarious, definitions indefinite and Court rulings contradictory. Is it possible, that the legislative
chambers which too pre-occupied with other...........to listen to Court signals calling for
clarification and of ambiguous clauses? A careful, prompt amendment of Section 2(j) would have
pre-empted this docket explosion before tribunals and Courts. This Court, perhaps more than the
legislative and executive branches, is deeply concerned with law's delays and to device a prompt
delivery system of social justice.76"

74
MANU/SC/0257/1978
75
Bangalore Water Supply And Sewerage Board Vs. A. Rajappa And Ors., MANU/SC/0257/1978
76
Calcutta Taxi Association And Ors. Vs. D.K. Banerjee And Ors., MANU/WB/0753/2002
35 | P a g e
 Empirical Analysis- A 360 Degree Perspective

It is interesting to note that only 30.8% of the participants believe that legal drafting is a separable
component of Legal Practice whereas the Legal Process outsourcing is largely in place.

Source: Field Researchh on Legal Drafting, Draft Panacea

The legal industry across the globe is gradually turning towards outsourcing for gaining efficiencies
and staying profitable in a highly competitive marketplace. The Indian Legal System is much like
the UK, US, Canada, and a sizeable part of Europe — the major source of outsourcing. LPOs
function as back office legal process outsourcing services partner and efficiently manage legal
drafting, documentation or analysis
sis requirements.77

Common services offered by such LPOs are Drafting legal pleadings, discovery documents and
other documents related to litigation Preparing discovery documents and pleadings for the review
of trial attorneys Analyzing and organizing leg
legal information. The above highlighted chart clarifies
that fact that the awareness even among the relatively informed data subject residing in urban
settlements of Indian subcontinent is considerably low on the technicalities of legal drafting. Such
large proportion of participants believe that pleadings cannot be separated from the overall practice
which in is also a reason for lack of opportunities in field of legal drafting to obtain expertise and
work upon the detoriating standards of legal drafting.

77
https://www.outsource2india.com/legal--services/legal-drafting-documentation-analysis.asp;
also visit- https://www.pathlegal.in/lpocompanies/india/law
https://www.pathlegal.in/lpocompanies/india/lawfirms-/
36 | P a g e
Analysis of Reasons of Poor Pleading Standards:

Source: Field Research on Legal Drafting, Draft Panacea

Inadequate Training in Law Schools:

Part –IV,
IV, Rules Of Legal Education, Bar Council Of India Rules clearly lays down the broad
canvass under which the legal education in carried out in India. However it is a common known
fact that it largely goes unregulated.

Part II (B) of the said Rules mentions Compulsory Clinical Courses ( Papers 21 to 24 as following):

Point 21 finds the mention of Draft

Drafting, Pleading and Conveyance as a compulsory paper in legal
education: Outline of the course:
(a) Drafting: -General
General principles of drafting and relevant substantive rules shall be taught
(b) Pleadings: -

(i)) Civil: Plaint, Written Statement, Interlocutory Application, Original Petition, Affidavit,
Execution Petition, Memorandum of Appeal and Revision, Petition under Article 226 and 32 of
the Constitution of India.

37 | P a g e
(ii)) Criminal: Complaint, Criminal Miscellaneous petition, Bail Application, Me
Memorandum of
Appeal and Revision.

(iii)) Conveyance: Sale Deed, Mortgage Deed, Lease Deed, Gift Deed, Promissory Note, Power of
Attorney, Will, Trust Deed.

(iv)) Drafting of writ petition and PIL petition .

The module further mentions that tthe course will be taught class instructions and simulation
exercises, preferably with assistance of practising lawyers/retired judges. Apart from teaching the
relevant provisions of law, the course may include not less than 15 practical exercises in drafting
carrying a total of 45 marks (3 marks for each)
each and 15 exercises in conveyancing
ing carrying another
45 marks (3 marks for each exercise) remaining 10 marks will be given for viva voice.

The fact that the BCI standards of Legal education are never met with satisfaction can be easily
highlighted with the graph below:

Source: Field Research on Legal Drafting, Draft Panacea

More than 70% participants believe that the level of legal drafting training they receive in law
schools is inadequate for practice or even meeting the bare minimum standards of legal drafting at
the levels of Indian Courts. The Legal Drafting modules in law schools are often a 4 credit based
course which is taken up with utmost disinterest. Furthermore, the copy
copy-paste
paste and template based

38 | P a g e
approach
ach of teaching has greatly harmed the skills of drafting the pleadings which in effect is one
of the largest contributors of poor pleadings at courts in India.

Lack of Infield Learning Opportunity:

Source: Field Research on Legal Drafting, Draft Panacea

P

It is quite evident from the above figures that the opportunities one get even while in-filed
in are
significantly scarce in order to inculcate the skills of legal drafting. 66.3% of the participants either
get rare opportunities to draft or was never ever considered for drafting a legal document.

A contemporary issue going to plague this concern even harsher is the Computer based automated
drafting softwares. Computer-aided
aided drafting software is reasonably common in the contemporary
legal world. A lawyer, paralegal, secretary, or do-it-yourselfer
do yourselfer works through a series of
question/answer dialogs, perhaps laced with reference material, and the system assembles a draft
document. There are daunting challenges to be faced in achieving the benefits of this new
paradigm. The continuous recomputation of text networks needed to deliver satisfactory
performance for a single law office could well require computing resources on the order of those
now deployed by Google for mapping the entire global web. 78

Marc Lauritsen , Current Frontiers In Legal Drafting Systems

78
Systems, Working Paper For The 11th
h International Conference
On AI And Law, Stanford University, June 2007.
39 | P a g e
Not only is demand unclear for advanced features such as those reviewed here, but significant
investments are required to deliver them commercially. Still, those features will enable much more
powerful and satisfying drafting experiences, and will draw new attention from previously reticent
drafters. While the transition will likely be gradual, waves of new functionality could result in
pervasively adopted drafting methodologies largely unseen today.

In Addl Commissioner Of Income Tax, Madras-I Vs. Gangabai Charities the court has observed
that: “6. The trust deed dated September 13, 1958, executed by Ganga Bai has been made a part of
the case. We have given the document the close attention it deserves. Parts of it we have read more
than once. At the end of it all we cannot withhold our comment that it is not a perfect piece of
legal drafting. We cannot, however, throw up our hands in despair. As a court of construction we
have to construe the dead even on its defective language. If the documents are clumsy, we have
to tidy it up as we go along in our construction. We must iron out the creases as one learned
English judge described the process, in another context. We must try to make out, as best as we
may, what the author of the trust was driving at. In order to enable us to do so, we will have to
take in the entire document and try to fit in all parts of the documents as of one piece, the
operative portions as well as the recitals. Our endeavor is to get at the object of this trust and we
must be thankful for these and other internal aids to construction wherever we may find them in
the body of the document.79”

79
Addl Commissioner Of Income Tax, Madras-I Vs. Gangabai Charities, MANU/TN/0031/1980
40 | P a g e
Copy Paste Approach:

Source: Field Research on Legal Drafting, Draft Panacea

While a go to option to majority of participants was Internet and web available drafts a
considerable half the participants regards it an easy option to ask for drafts of documents to be
drafted from peers. Since the question was a preference order based employing own skills and
knowledge falls third in the ladder. This
T clearly highlights the copy- paste model that has been a
norm in Drafting.

41 | P a g e
 SUGGESTIONS

Litigation is extremely complex, and any attempt to quantify the outcomes of any discourse carries
with it certain inherent risks, many of which have been discussed in this report. But at the very
least, these data suggests avenues for further research. We would benefit by having more inclusive
cohorts and more precise comparison groups focused on this concern. To the extent we can
eliminate methodological flaws in case selection, data collection and other error removal, we
should strive to do so. But whatever the flaws may be in the methodology used here, the data forces
us to confront the strength of different arguments for elevating the standards of pleadings. In the
absence of huge empirical data, it is insufficient to continue to rest on the assumption that the
reasons highlighted here are the only factors and reasons responsible for the concerning state of
affairs of Legal Drafting and pleading.

The need of the hour however is to revamp and develop holistic understanding towards drafting- its
importance, effects and aspects. The way ahead is working punctiliously at each stage and with all
stakeholders. Capacity building initiatives are a must to achieve this goal. Law students need to
understand that drafting is not just a clinical course awarding them a few add on credit in their
course, but a vital aspect of justice dispensing system.

Similarly the working professionals in the industry need to emphasize upon the importance of niche
drafting & the technical aspects involved in a particular area of practice. Ultimately it is the
beneficiaries who are the focal point of any service. Thus the masses need to be aware that how
legal drafting makes or breaks their case and why is it important to choose a professional who is not
just a mouthpiece of their concerns but a skilled draftsman.

42 | P a g e
 CONCLUSION

The brief survey of pleading made in this article should show that no reasons can be exhaustive
while determining the causes and effects of pleadings and its standards at the various levels of
Courts in a country of the size of India. However it can safely be said that there does exist a serious
need to address the concern of poor legal drafting, especially at the grass root level. The non
availability of resources, opportunities and lack of awareness can be considered primary reasons of
the huge disparity in the understanding of the concerns pertaining to pleadings standards.

While tall orders of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 and the Advocate on Record has been created
by the wisdom of the apex court to maintain its decorum and ensure compliance of its standards, it
is regretful that the basic rights of access to justice suffer at the lower levels of court due to
unreasonable drafting styles, and other error and omissions. It is only with the realization and of-
course that would come with an open and wide discourse on the topic.

This report is among those very few efforts that have been attempted to highlight these highly
volatile concerns in the legal services. The right discourse, awareness and effort can make the
seemingly small issue make a great change in the justice system in India. With this I conclude
saying that may India have it very own Twombly and Iqbal Pleading Judgments to revamp the
pleading standards or at the very least open up the discourse in the main stream.

43 | P a g e
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Statutes:
1. Order VI Rule 17 Code of Civil Procedure
2. New York Code of 1848
3. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
4. Part –IV, Rules Of Legal Education, Bar Council Of India Rules
5. Supreme Court Rules, 2013

Articles, Blogs & Publications:

1. Alexander A. Reinert, The Costs Of Heightened Pleading, Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 86:119

2. Hepburn, Devlopment Ov Code Plieading, 31.

3. Marc Lauritsen , Current Frontiers In Legal Drafting Systems, Working Paper For The 11th
International Conference On Ai And Law, Stanford University, June 2007.

4. Christopher Honeyman & Andrea Kupfer Schneider, Catching Up With The Major-
General: The Need For A “Canon Of Negotiation,” 87 Marq. L. Rev. 637 (2004)

5. Charles E. Clark., History, Systems And Functions Of Pleading, Yale Law School

6. Mason, Charles Bliven, "Pleadings Their History- Comparison Of The Common Law And
Code Systems Technicalities Of The Code" (1895). Historical Theses And Dissertations
Collection. Paper 45.

7. Moffitt, Michael (2005) "Pleadings In The Age Of Settlement," Indiana Law Journal: Vol.
80 : Iss. 3 , Article 3.

8. 35 A. B. A. Rep. 614, 638, 639 (1910), (Prepared By Dean Roscoe Pound And Approved
By The Committee)

9. Per Collins, M. R., In Re Coles, [1907] 1 K. B. 4

44 | P a g e
 10. Charles E. Clark., History, Systems And Functions Of Pleading, Yale Law School

11. Lb 502 Drafting, Pleadings, Full Material.

12. No. 606cv089, 2008 Wl 474426 (S.D. Ga., Feb. 19, 2008).

13. Smith, Douglas Geoffrey, The Evolution Of A New Pleading Standard: Ashcroft V. Iqbal
(August 28, 2009). Oregon Law Review, Vol. 88, No. 44, 2009.

14. A. B. Spencer, Understanding Pleading Doctrine, 108 Mich. L. Rev. 1 (2009).

15. Gregory M. Duhl, The Ethics Of Contract Drafting

Online Resources:
1. https://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdgnew/?p=main/pend_dashboard
2. http://scaoraindia.com/aboutus.aspx
3. https://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdgnew/?p=main/pend_dashboard
4. https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol108/iss1/1
5. https://ssrn.com/abstract=146384.
6. http://lawfaculty.du.ac.in/files/course_material/Old_Course_Material/LB%20502%20Drafti
ng,%20Pleadings,%20Full%20Material%20.pdf

Legal Database:
1. www.scconline.com
2. www.indiankanoon.com
3. www.manupatra.com
4. www.westlaw.com

45 | P a g e
 APPENDIX

List of Documents relied on for the purpose of Empirical Study:

1. Copy of Google Form- “Field Research on Legal Drafting”: Template of the Google form
used for collecting the data for conducting empirical analysis of various aspects of
Standards of Legal Drafting.

2. Copy of Field Research on Legal Drafting (Excel Response Sheet)

3. National Judicial Data Grid Webpage

46 | P a g e
11/22/2020 Field Research on Legal Drafting

Field Research on Legal Dra ing

Legal Drafting is a skill, sine qua non to Legal Practice. However its standards & affordability
factors are concerning. This short research form would help build a better understanding on
various unexplored aspects of Legal Drafting.

* Required

I am *

A Law Professional

A Law Student

A Para-Legal

E-mail ID *
This is just for the sake of authentication, you shall never receive any commercial mails from us.

Your answer

Do you think legal drafting is a separable component of legal practice? *

Yes

No

May be

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfv5n9SCZKa00NYHTItZFR-vNk66x8osJ7mCFuDrR_noJUCtw/viewform 1/4
11/22/2020 Field Research on Legal Drafting

How concerning is the poor standards of legal drafting in the legal profession? *

1 2 3 4 5

Not at all concerning Greatly concerning

How do you think Legal Drafting standards impact the Indian Justice system? *

Supplements pendency and delay in cases

Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties

Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices

Other:

Do you know or believe that there exists disparity in legal drafting standards
across the hierarchy of courts? *

Yes, a concerning disparity

Yes, a workable disparity

No disparity as such

Other:

What do you believe is the biggest reason of poor legal drafting standards? *

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfv5n9SCZKa00NYHTItZFR-vNk66x8osJ7mCFuDrR_noJUCtw/viewform 2/4
11/22/2020 Field Research on Legal Drafting
Inadequate training at law schools

Copy- Paste approach

Lack of in-field learning opportunities

Other:

On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate teaching of legal drafting in your law
school? *

1 2 3 4 5

Negligible Excellent

How often are you given legal drafting work during your internships/
apprenticeship? *

Always

Often

Rarely

Never

How often do you look up to for an additional Legal Drafting course to enhance
your skills? *

Very often

Do look up, but not that often

Do not find such need

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfv5n9SCZKa00NYHTItZFR-vNk66x8osJ7mCFuDrR_noJUCtw/viewform 3/4
11/22/2020 Field Research on Legal Drafting

How do you go about drafting? *

Relying on online templates

Drafts from peers

Deploying your expertise and skills

Outsourcing

Other:

As a lawyer, if you come across a platform that provides you good quality drafts
at very affordable price, how inclined would you be to prefer it? *

Render all drafting work to that platform

Use that platform only for urgent drafting work

Continue traditional way of drafting

Other:

Submit

Never submit passwords through Google Forms.

This content is neither created nor endorsed by Google. Report Abuse - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy

 Forms

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfv5n9SCZKa00NYHTItZFR-vNk66x8osJ7mCFuDrR_noJUCtw/viewform 4/4
I am Do you think
Howlegal
concerning
draftingHow
isisathe
do
separable
poor
you think
standards
component
Legal of
Drafting
legal
of legal
drafting
standards
practice?
in the
impact
legalthe
profession?
DoIndian
you know
Justice
or system?
believe that
What
there
do exists
you believe
disparity
is
Onthe
ina legal
scale
biggest
How
drafting
ofoften
reason
1 to 5,
standards
are
How
how
ofyou
poor
do
would
given
you
legal
across
you
go
legal
drafting
about
rate
thedrafting
hierarchy
teaching
drafting?
standards?
work
of
ofduring
legal
courts?
drafting
your internships/
in your lawapprenticeship?
school?
A Law Student No 4 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties
Yes, a concerning disparity
Copy- Paste approach 1 Rarely Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools,
3 Often Copy-Drafts
Pastefrom
approach,
peers Lack of in-field learning opportunities
A Law Student May be 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
1 RarelyCopy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices
Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers,
opportunities
Outsourcing
A Law Student Yes 5 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a workable disparity Inadequate training at law schools
1 Never Drafts from peers
A Law Student No 5 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties,
Yes, a concerning
Triggers unprofessionalism
disparity
Inadequateand
training
malpractices
at law schools,
2 AlwaysLack of
Deploying
in-field learning
your expertise
opportunities
and skills
A Law Student No 5 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties
Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools
3 Rarely Relying on online templates
A Law Student Yes 3 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
2 RarelyCopy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach
on online
and malpractices
templates, Drafts from peers, Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 3 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
2 Often Copy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices
Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers,
opportunities
Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Professional
No 3 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, TriggersYes,
unprofessionalism
a workable disparity
and malpractices
Inadequate training at law schools,
2 Often Copy-Relying
Paste approach
on online templates
A Law Student No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a workable
affects disparity
the accessInadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
1 NeverCopy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices
Lack
templates
of in-field learning opportunities
A Law Professional
No 4 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools,
3 AlwaysCopy-Deploying
Paste approach
your expertise and skills
A Law Student Yes 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
1 Often Copy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices
Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers,
opportunities
Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 1 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties
Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools
1 Rarely Deploying your expertise and skills
A Para-Legal No 5 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools,
1 RarelyCopy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates
of in-field learning opportunities
A Law Student Yes 3 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a workable disparity Lack of in-field learning opportunities
2 Rarely Drafts from peers
A Law Student Yes 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties
at law schools,
1 RarelyLack of
Relying
in-fieldon
learning
online templates,
opportunities
Outsourcing
A Law Student Yes 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties
at law schools,
1 RarelyLack of
Relying
in-fieldon
learning
online templates,
opportunities
Drafts from peers
A Law Student No 2 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties
Yes, a workable disparity Inadequate training at law schools,
2 Often Copy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates,
of in-field
Deploying
learning
your
opportunities
expertise and skills
A Law Student Yes 4 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties,
Yes, a concerning
Triggers unprofessionalism
disparity
Inadequateand
training
malpractices
at law schools,
3 RarelyCopy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates
of in-field learning opportunities
A Law Student No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases Yes, a workable disparity Inadequate training at law schools,
2 NeverLack of
Outsourcing
in-field learning opportunities
A Law Student No 4 Supplements pendency and delay in cases Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools
4 Never Relying on online templates
A Law Student Yes 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
1 RarelyCopy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices,
Lack
templates
of in-fieldInterpretation
learning opportunities,
of each words
Lackinofthe
involvement
draft must and
be inparticipation
an appropriate
of benef
form
A Law Student No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
2 RarelyCopy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices
Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers,
opportunities,
DeployingNotyour
included
expertise
in the
and
curriculum.
skills While a law stu
A Law Student No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, TriggersYes,
unprofessionalism
a concerning disparity
and malpractices
Copy- Paste approach, Lack
4 of
Always
in-field learning
Relyingopportunities
on online templates, Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 4 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a workable disparity Inadequate training at law schools,
2 RarelyLack of
Drafts
in-field
from
learning
peers opportunities
A Law Professional
Yes 5 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties,
Yes, a concerning
Triggers unprofessionalism
disparity
Inadequateand
training
malpractices
at law schools,
1 RarelyLack of
Outsourcing
in-field learning opportunities
A Law Student No 5 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties,
Yes, a concerning
Triggers unprofessionalism
disparity
Inadequateand
training
malpractices
at law schools,
2 NeverCopy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers
opportunities
A Law Professional
No 5 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties,
Yes, a concerning
Triggers unprofessionalism
disparity
Copy- Paste
andapproach,
malpractices
Lack
1 of
Never
in-field learning
Drafts opportunities
from peers, Outsourcing
A Law Student Yes 3 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties
Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools,
1 RarelyCopy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers,
opportunities
Outsourcing
A Law Student Yes 4 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties,
Yes, a concerning
Triggers unprofessionalism
disparity
Inadequateand
training
malpractices
at law schools,
3 Often Lack of
Drafts
in-field
from
learning
peers,opportunities
Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 3 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties
Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools
4 Rarely Drafts from peers, Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 4 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, TriggersYes,
unprofessionalism
a workable disparity
and malpractices
Inadequate training at law schools,
3 AlwaysCopy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers
opportunities
A Law Student No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a workable
affects disparity
the accessInadequate
to justice training
of the parties
at law schools,
1 Often Copy-Deploying
Paste approach
your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 5 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties
Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools
3 Rarely Relying on online templates
A Law Student May be 3 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a workable
affects disparity
the accessInadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
4 Often Copy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices
Lack
templates,
of in-field
Deploying
learning
your
opportunities
expertise and skills
A Law Student No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases Yes, a concerning disparity
Copy- Paste approach 1 Rarely Relying on online templates
A Law Student No 3 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools,
5 Often Copy-Drafts
Pastefrom
approach,
peers,Lack
Deploying
of in-field
yourlearning
expertise
opportunities
and skills
A Law Professional
May be 5 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties,
Yes, a workable
Triggers disparity
unprofessionalism
Inadequateand
training
malpractices
at law schools,
1 RarelyLack of
Drafts
in-field
from
learning
peers,opportunities
Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 5 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties,
Yes, a concerning
Triggers unprofessionalism
disparity
Copy- Paste
andapproach,
malpractices
Lack
1 of
Rarely
in-field learning
Relyingopportunities
on online templates
A Law Student Yes 3 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties
at law schools,
2 NeverCopy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers
opportunities
A Law Student No 4 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
2 RarelyCopy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices
Lack
templates
of in-field learning opportunities
A Law Student Yes 4 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, TriggersYes,
unprofessionalism
a workable disparity
and malpractices
Inadequate training at law schools,
1 RarelyCopy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates,
of in-field
Deploying
learning
your
opportunities
expertise and skills
A Law Student No 5 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties
Yes, a concerning disparity
Lack of in-field learning opportunities
5 Often Relying on online templates
I am Do you think
Howlegal
concerning
draftingHow
isisathe
do
separable
poor
you think
standards
component
Legal of
Drafting
legal
of legal
drafting
standards
practice?
in the
impact
legalthe
profession?
DoIndian
you know
Justice
or system?
believe that
What
there
do exists
you believe
disparity
is
Onthe
ina legal
scale
biggest
How
drafting
ofoften
reason
1 to 5,
standards
are
How
how
ofyou
poor
do
would
given
you
legal
across
you
go
legal
drafting
about
rate
thedrafting
hierarchy
teaching
drafting?
standards?
work
of
ofduring
legal
courts?
drafting
your internships/
in your lawapprenticeship?
school?
A Law Student No 3 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
2 Often Copy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices
Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers,
opportunities
Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 4 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a workable disparity Inadequate training at law schools
2 Rarely Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 4 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties
Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools,
1 RarelyCopy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers
opportunities
A Law Student No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, TriggersYes,
unprofessionalism
a workable disparity
and malpractices
Inadequate training at law schools,
2 RarelyCopy-Drafts
Pastefrom
approach,
peers,Lack
Deploying
of in-field
yourlearning
expertise
opportunities
and skills
A Law Professional
No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a workable
affects disparity
the accessInadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
4 RarelyCopy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach
on online
and malpractices
templates, Drafts from peers
A Law Student No 4 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties,
Yes, a workable
Triggers disparity
unprofessionalism
Inadequateand
training
malpractices
at law schools,
1 Often Lack of
Drafts
in-field
from
learning
peers,opportunities
Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 3 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, TriggersYes,
unprofessionalism
a workable disparity
and malpractices
Inadequate training at law schools,
4 Often Copy-Drafts
Pastefrom
approach,
peers,Lack
Deploying
of in-field
yourlearning
expertise
opportunities
and skills
A Law Student No 4 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a workable disparity Inadequate training at law schools,
2 Often Lack of
Relying
in-fieldon
learning
online templates,
opportunities
Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 4 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a workable
affects disparity
the accessInadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
1 RarelyCopy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices
Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers,
opportunities
Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, TriggersYes,
unprofessionalism
a workable disparity
and malpractices
Inadequate training at law schools,
1 RarelyCopy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers
opportunities
A Law Student No 4 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, TriggersNo
unprofessionalism
disparity as suchand malpractices
Inadequate training at law schools,
5 RarelyLack of
Deploying
in-field learning
your expertise
opportunities
and skills
A Law Student No 5 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools
3 Often Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 3 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a workable
affects disparity
the accessInadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
1 Often Copy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices
Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers
opportunities
A Law Student No 4 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
1 RarelyCopy-
unprofessionalism
Haven't
Paste approach,
drafted
andone.
malpractices
Lack of in-field learning opportunities
A Law Student Yes 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases Yes, a concerning disparity
Copy- Paste approach 4 Rarely Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 5 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties
Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools
2 Rarely Drafts from peers
A Law Student Yes 5 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a workable disparity Lack of in-field learning opportunities
3 Often Relying on online templates, Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 5 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties
Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools
1 Rarely Relying on online templates
A Law Student No 5 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties,
Yes, a concerning
Triggers unprofessionalism
disparity
Inadequateand
training
malpractices
at law schools,
1 NeverLack of
Relying
in-fieldon
learning
online templates,
opportunities
Drafts from peers
A Law Student Yes 4 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, TriggersYes,
unprofessionalism
a concerning disparity
and malpractices
Inadequate training at law schools,
1 RarelyCopy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates
of in-field learning opportunities
A Law Student Yes 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
1 RarelyLack
unprofessionalism
of
Relying
in-fieldon
learning
online
and malpractices
templates,
opportunities
Drafts from peers
A Law Student Yes 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
2 Often Copy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices
Lack
templates,
of in-field
Outsourcing
learning opportunities
A Law Student Yes 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, TriggersYes,
unprofessionalism
a concerning disparity
and malpractices
Inadequate training at law schools,
1 RarelyCopy-Drafts
Pastefrom
approach,
peers,Lack
Deploying
of in-field
yourlearning
expertise
opportunities
and skills
A Law Student No 3 Supplements pendency and delay in cases Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools,
5 RarelyCopy-Drafts
Pastefrom
approach,
peers,Lack
Outsourcing
of in-field learning opportunities
A Law Professional
No 4 Supplements pendency and delay in cases Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools,
2 Often Copy-Deploying
Paste approach
your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
2 RarelyLack
unprofessionalism
of
Relying
in-fieldon
learning
online
and malpractices
templates,
opportunities
Drafts from peers, Books related to drafting
A Law Student Yes 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, TriggersYes,
unprofessionalism
a workable disparity
and malpractices
Inadequate training at law schools,
4 Often Copy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers,
opportunities
Outsourcing
A Law Student No 3 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, TriggersYes,
unprofessionalism
a concerning disparity
and malpractices
Inadequate training at law schools,
5 Often Lack of
Drafts
in-field
from
learning
peers,opportunities
Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student Yes 4 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties,
Yes, a concerning
Triggers unprofessionalism
disparity
Inadequateand
training
malpractices
at law schools,
1 RarelyCopy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers
opportunities
A Law Student No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
2 Always Copy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices
Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers,
opportunities
Outsourcing
A Law Student No 5 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties
Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools
1 Rarely Relying on online templates
A Law Student Yes 5 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a workable disparity Inadequate training at law schools
3 Often Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 4 Supplements pendency and delay in cases Yes, a workable disparity Inadequate training at law schools
4 Rarely Drafts from peers
A Law Student No 4 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a concerning disparity
Lack of in-field learning opportunities
1 Always Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student Yes 3 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties
Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools,
3 RarelyLack of
Relying
in-fieldon
learning
online templates
opportunities
A Law Student No 3 Supplements pendency and delay in cases Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools,
1 Often Copy-Drafts
Pastefrom
approach,
peers,Lack
Deploying
of in-field
yourlearning
expertise
opportunities
and skills
A Law Student No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
1 RarelyCopy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices
Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers,
opportunities,
DeployingLack
your
of expertise
interest ofand
students
skills too
A Law Student No 3 Supplements pendency and delay in cases Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools,
5 RarelyCopy-Drafts
Pastefrom
approach,
peers,Lack
Outsourcing
of in-field learning opportunities
A Law Student May be 3 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties
No disparity as such Inadequate training at law schools,
2 RarelyCopy-Drafts
Pastefrom
approach,
peers,Lack
Deploying
of in-field
yourlearning
expertise
opportunities
and skills
A Law Student No 4 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a workable disparity Lack of in-field learning opportunities
3 Often Relying on online templates
A Law Student No 4 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a workable disparity Inadequate training at law schools,
1 RarelyCopy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates,
of in-field
Outsourcing
learning opportunities
A Law Student Yes 5 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a workable disparity Inadequate training at law schools,
1 NeverCopy-Relying
Paste approach
on online templates, Drafts from peers
A Law Student May be 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, TriggersYes,
unprofessionalism
a workable disparity
and malpractices
Inadequate training at law schools,
1 RarelyCopy-Relying
Paste approach
on online templates, Outsourcing
I am Do you think
Howlegal
concerning
draftingHow
isisathe
do
separable
poor
you think
standards
component
Legal of
Drafting
legal
of legal
drafting
standards
practice?
in the
impact
legalthe
profession?
DoIndian
you know
Justice
or system?
believe that
What
there
do exists
you believe
disparity
is
Onthe
ina legal
scale
biggest
How
drafting
ofoften
reason
1 to 5,
standards
are
How
how
ofyou
poor
do
would
given
you
legal
across
you
go
legal
drafting
about
rate
thedrafting
hierarchy
teaching
drafting?
standards?
work
of
ofduring
legal
courts?
drafting
your internships/
in your lawapprenticeship?
school?
A Law Student No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
1 RarelyCopy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices
Lack
templates,
of in-field
Deploying
learning
your
opportunities
expertise and skills, Outsourcing
A Law Student No 5 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties,
Yes, a concerning
Triggers unprofessionalism
disparity
Inadequateand
training
malpractices
at law schools,
1 RarelyCopy-Drafts
Pastefrom
approach,
peers Lack of in-field learning opportunities
A Law Student No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
2 NeverCopy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices
Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers,
opportunities
Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student Yes 4 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Lack
to justice
of in-field
of the
learning
parties,
opportunities
Triggers
1 Rarelyunprofessionalism
Relying on online
and malpractices
templates
A Law Student May be 5 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools,
2 RarelyCopy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates,
of in-field
Drafts
learning
from peers,
opportunities
Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 3 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools
1 Rarely Drafts from peers
A Law Student Yes 5 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties,
Yes, a concerning
Triggers unprofessionalism
disparity
Inadequateand
training
malpractices
at law schools
3 Often Drafts from peers, Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student No 4 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
3 RarelyCopy-
unprofessionalism
Relying
Paste approach,
on online
and malpractices
Lack
templates,
of in-field
Deploying
learning
your
opportunities
expertise and skills
A Law Student No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools
1 Never Relying on online templates
A Law Student Yes 3 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Maintaining
Yes,standard
a workable
of legal
disparity
drafting
Inadequate
certainlytraining
helps inatimproving
law schools,
5 Never
the Copy-
specific
Relying
Paste
discriptional
approach,
on online
approach
Lack
templates,
ofof
in-field
any
Deploying
situation
learning
your
because
opportunities
expertise
the words
and skills,
usedOutsourcing
in drafting have their specific meanin
A Law Student No 5 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties
Yes, a concerning disparity
Copy- Paste approach 3 Often Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student Yes 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a concerning
affects the
disparity
access
Inadequate
to justice training
of the parties
at law schools,
1 RarelyCopy-Relying
Paste approach
on online templates, Drafts from peers
A Law Student Yes 2 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties
Yes, a concerning disparity
Inadequate training at law schools,
3 Often Copy-Relying
Paste approach
on online templates, Drafts from peers, Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student Yes 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a workable
affects disparity
the accessInadequate
to justice training
of the parties
at law schools,
1 RarelyCopy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates,
of in-field
Outsourcing
learning opportunities
A Law Student No 4 Adversely affects affects the access to justice of the parties,
Yes, a workable
Triggers disparity
unprofessionalism
Inadequateand
training
malpractices
at law schools,
1 Often Copy-Relying
Paste approach
on online templates, Deploying your expertise and skills
A Law Student Yes 4 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a workable
affects disparity
the accessInadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
1 RarelyCopy-
unprofessionalism
Drafts
Pastefrom
approach,
peers
and malpractices
Lack of in-field learning opportunities
A Law Student Yes 5 Triggers unprofessionalism and malpractices Yes, a workable disparity Inadequate training at law schools,
4 RarelyCopy-Relying
Paste approach,
on online Lack
templates,
of in-field
Deploying
learning
your
opportunities
expertise and skills
A Law Student No 5 Supplements pendency and delay in cases, Adversely
Yes,
affects
a workable
affects disparity
the accessInadequate
to justice training
of the parties,
at law schools,
Triggers
3 Often Copy-
unprofessionalism
associates
Paste approach,
guidance
and malpractices
Lack
in of
lawin-field
firms learning opportunities
11/22/2020 Welcome to NJDG - National Judicial Data Grid

Drill Down Pending Dashboard Disposed Dashboard Alerts

Information Management

9844757
Total Civil Cases

26260593
Total Criminal Cases

36105350
Total Cases

7864281 (79.88%)
Civil Cases More Than 1 Year Old

20795509 (79.19%)
Criminal Cases More Than 1 Year Old

28659790 (79.38%)
Cases More Than 1 Year Old

The above shown figures are upto Current Date ×

Select State

Select District

 Matter Type Pendency Pie Chart 

Civil Criminal Both Select


https://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdgnew/?p=main/pend_dashboard 1/6
11/22/2020 Welcome to NJDG - National Judicial Data Grid

Original:- 7274948 (74.11 %)

Appeal:- 496487 (5.06 %)
Application:- 620118 (6.32 %)
Execution:- 1424657 (14.51 %)

 Original Case Type Wise Disposal 

(68.23 %)
4,963,377

(11.97 %)
870,886 (7.56 %) (7.16 %)
549,877 520,925 (2.07 %) (1.14 %) (0.67 %)
150,870 82,964 48,689
Civil MACP Misc. Marriage Land Labour Arbitration
Suit Civil Petition Reference Court Main
Cases Main and
Cases Misc.

 Age Wise Pendency Pie Chart 

Civil Criminal Both Select Case Type

https://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdgnew/?p=main/pend_dashboard 2/6
11/22/2020 Welcome to NJDG - National Judicial Data Grid

0 to 1 years:- 3951769 (40.12 %)

1 to 3 years:- 2604937 (26.45 %)
3 to 5 years:- 1377476 (13.98 %)
5 to 10 years:- 1295372 (13.15 %)
10 to 20 years:- 479366 (4.87 %)
20 to 30 years:- 106308 (1.08 %)
 Age Wise line Chart 

2,200,000

2,000,000

1,800,000

1,600,000

1,400,000

1,200,000

1,000,000

800,000

600,000

400,000

200,000

0
2020 2019

 Stage Wise Pendency Pie Chart 

Civil Criminal Both Select Case Type

https://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdgnew/?p=main/pend_dashboard 3/6
11/22/2020 Welcome to NJDG - National Judicial Data Grid

Appearance/Service Related:- 2438663 (25.9

Compliance/Steps/stay:- 1674936 (17.83 %)
Evidence/Argument/Judgement:- 3996961 (4
Pleadings/Issues/Charge:- 1280979 (13.64 %

 Evidence/Argument/Judgement Wise Pendency 

(22.14 %)
(21.30 %)
1,610,830
1,549,908

(5.05 %) (4.80 %)
367,315 348,876

(0.94 %)
(0.34 %) (0.14 %)
68,059
24,422 9,877
HEARING EVIDENCE ARGUMENTS ORDERS PRE-TRIAL JUDGMENT EBC
EVID

 Institution Vs Disposal 

Civil Criminal Both Select Year

 Case Type 

https://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdgnew/?p=main/pend_dashboard 4/6
11/22/2020 Welcome to NJDG - National Judicial Data Grid

 Original

 Execution

 Appeal

 Application

 Institution Vs Disposal 12728543 11617735 

3,000,000

2,500,000

2,000,000

1,500,000

1,000,000

500,000

0
2018 2017 2016 2015
Institution Disposal

 Delay Reason Pendency Pie Chart 

Civil Criminal Both Age > Submit

https://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdgnew/?p=main/pend_dashboard 5/6
11/22/2020 Welcome to NJDG - National Judicial Data Grid

Securing Presence:- 1941817 (47.72 %)

Unattended:- 1065969 (26.20 %)
Stayed:- 673231 (16.55 %)
Awaiting Record:- 217602 (5.35 %)
Frequent Applications:- 112222 (2.76 %)
Execution:- 43843 (1.08 %)
Bulky Case:- 14145 (0.35 %)

 Securing Presence - Delay Reason Pendency Line Chart 

Select

400,000

350,000

300,000

250,000

200,000

150,000

100,000

50,000

0
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
09
08
07
06
05
04
03
02
01
00
99
98
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20

20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
19
19

s2 Disclaimer

https://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdgnew/?p=main/pend_dashboard 6/6