Supreme Court lays down timeline to be adhered to by lawyers for oral arguments in Yatin Oza case; asks them to cite only relevant case laws

The Supreme Court on Wednesday laid down specific timelines to be adhered to by counsel while arguing the case relating to revocation of Senior designation of Gujarat lawyer, Yatin Oza. .A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and R Subhash Reddy also said that lawyers should cite only the "best judgments" relevant to their case and should refrain from referring to large number of precedents/ case laws. "The schedule of hearing for learned counsels is being set down since even earlier we have heard learned counsel for parties and spent some time. The parties will, needless to say, file a short synopsis running into not more than three pages each and confine their submissions in the line of that synopsis with not more than one judgment cited per proposition. Mr. Arvind Dattar and Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, learned senior counsels between themselves will take one hour. We have made it clear that we will not permit multiple counsels to argue," the Court directed. The Court also asked the lawyers to submit a synopsis of their arguments in advance and stick to their pleadings while arguing the case."Cite the best judgment in your favour and don't just go on citing cases. Twenty volumes of SCC produced in a year and that is a problem. Cite your best judgment and argue and stick to the synopsis," said the Bench..The Court was hearing a plea by Oza against the decision of the Gujarat High Court to revoke his senior designation and the judgment holding him guilty of contempt of court for his statements against the High Court. .The top court on Wednesday stayed the contempt of court proceedings initiated against Oza till the completion of the proceedings before the Supreme Court.The case will now be heard on September 1, 2021. .Justice Kaul has long been in favour of shorter oral hearings and crisp pleadings..In the judgment in Ajit Mohan vs Delhi Legislative Assembly case, he had penned a postscript stating that "Supreme Court has become a competing arena of who gets to argue for the longest time.".Court has become competing arena of who gets to argue the longest; there should be restriction on time period for oral submissions: Supreme Court."We really doubt whether any judicial forum anywhere in the world would allow such time periods to be taken for oral submissions and these be further supplemented by written synopsis thereafter," the Court had said in that judgment. .The observations were made after the Court noted that 26 hours of judicial time was spent on hearing that case.It expressed apprehensions about how the situation would turn out once the COVID pandemic is over and the Court resumes full-fledged functioning which will see a surge in number or cases pending for adjudication..[Read Order]