In a recent survey conducted on the virtual Court system in Supreme Court, a little over three-fourth of the lawyers who participated said that they faced technical issues on the Vidyo App being used for video conferencing of hearings. .75.7% of the 210 participants in the survey said that effective opportunity of a hearing in a case stands denied when the hearing is marred by a number of technical glitches. These glitches, it was suggested, are a common feature on the Vidyo App, which is the primary platform used in the Supreme Court for conducting virtual hearings..Over a third of the participants favoured moving from Vidyo App on to another platform for the smooth functioning of the hearings, with Cisco Webex finding itself to be the most popular choice..The Vidyo hearings see a number of Advocates often being dropped out of the video conferencing call and are often not unmuted by the Main Control room handling all the participants to these calls, some of the main complaints showed.."The situation is even more chaotic in batch matters where a large number of Advocates are appearing. Some Advocates have also stated that they have been disconnected by the Control Room too early or while orders were being dictated in their cases," the survey report states, in its findings..The result of either being dropped out of the call or not being unmuted in time is that the Advocates are unable to present their arguments. This has also led to orders being passed against some parties whose lawyers were victims of these technical issues. 19 of the participants in the survey have had adverse orders passed against them in their absence, report says..The recommendation made in the report on this aspect stresses on adequate training and sensitization of the control room staff to ensure that lawyers are not prematurely logged out or kept on mute for the duration of the proceedings..Lawyers have also complained of the quality of audio and video of video conference calls and have. It is also stated that there is a deficiency in terms of a grievance redressal or technical support from the Court staff. A large majority of the participants felt that the issues can be better addressed if there is at least one technical support staff designated for and attached to each Virtual Courtroom..As regards aspects such as e-filing, it was found that tasks such as curing of defects et al were tedious in e-filing system and suggestions were made for ensuring that Registry staff is adequately trained in the technology and modalities of e-filing. Moreover, it is also suggested that online modes of payment should be made available for e-filing with a provision for printable receipts..They survey however shows that while a little over half of the participants preferred e-filing to physical filing, 41% of the participants had faced some technical issues while doing e-filing..Mentioning and Listing of matters also has seen a change due to a shift from the physical courts to e-courts. However, if rules and procedures can be put in place for listing of fresh matters within seven days of the filing of petitions and applications, there will no longer be a need to for mentioning applications, the survey report says in its recommendations.."Some time limit ought to be fixed for deciding a Mentioning Application. It is suggested that Mentioning Applications preferably be decided within 24 hours and an outer limit of 48 hours be fixed. If rejected, reasons should be provided. A procedure ought to be devised to permit oral mentioning before an appropriate Virtual Court.".The survey was conducted by five Advocates on Record, Bhabna Das, D Abhinav Rao, Harsh Parashar, Krishna Dev J and RV Yogesh in order to find ways and means to improve the digital systems in place at present..A total of 227 genine responses were received for this survey of which 13 were Senior Advocates, 133 AoRs, and 81 Advocates which included 8 Advocates representing their law firms..Read the Report:
In a recent survey conducted on the virtual Court system in Supreme Court, a little over three-fourth of the lawyers who participated said that they faced technical issues on the Vidyo App being used for video conferencing of hearings. .75.7% of the 210 participants in the survey said that effective opportunity of a hearing in a case stands denied when the hearing is marred by a number of technical glitches. These glitches, it was suggested, are a common feature on the Vidyo App, which is the primary platform used in the Supreme Court for conducting virtual hearings..Over a third of the participants favoured moving from Vidyo App on to another platform for the smooth functioning of the hearings, with Cisco Webex finding itself to be the most popular choice..The Vidyo hearings see a number of Advocates often being dropped out of the video conferencing call and are often not unmuted by the Main Control room handling all the participants to these calls, some of the main complaints showed.."The situation is even more chaotic in batch matters where a large number of Advocates are appearing. Some Advocates have also stated that they have been disconnected by the Control Room too early or while orders were being dictated in their cases," the survey report states, in its findings..The result of either being dropped out of the call or not being unmuted in time is that the Advocates are unable to present their arguments. This has also led to orders being passed against some parties whose lawyers were victims of these technical issues. 19 of the participants in the survey have had adverse orders passed against them in their absence, report says..The recommendation made in the report on this aspect stresses on adequate training and sensitization of the control room staff to ensure that lawyers are not prematurely logged out or kept on mute for the duration of the proceedings..Lawyers have also complained of the quality of audio and video of video conference calls and have. It is also stated that there is a deficiency in terms of a grievance redressal or technical support from the Court staff. A large majority of the participants felt that the issues can be better addressed if there is at least one technical support staff designated for and attached to each Virtual Courtroom..As regards aspects such as e-filing, it was found that tasks such as curing of defects et al were tedious in e-filing system and suggestions were made for ensuring that Registry staff is adequately trained in the technology and modalities of e-filing. Moreover, it is also suggested that online modes of payment should be made available for e-filing with a provision for printable receipts..They survey however shows that while a little over half of the participants preferred e-filing to physical filing, 41% of the participants had faced some technical issues while doing e-filing..Mentioning and Listing of matters also has seen a change due to a shift from the physical courts to e-courts. However, if rules and procedures can be put in place for listing of fresh matters within seven days of the filing of petitions and applications, there will no longer be a need to for mentioning applications, the survey report says in its recommendations.."Some time limit ought to be fixed for deciding a Mentioning Application. It is suggested that Mentioning Applications preferably be decided within 24 hours and an outer limit of 48 hours be fixed. If rejected, reasons should be provided. A procedure ought to be devised to permit oral mentioning before an appropriate Virtual Court.".The survey was conducted by five Advocates on Record, Bhabna Das, D Abhinav Rao, Harsh Parashar, Krishna Dev J and RV Yogesh in order to find ways and means to improve the digital systems in place at present..A total of 227 genine responses were received for this survey of which 13 were Senior Advocates, 133 AoRs, and 81 Advocates which included 8 Advocates representing their law firms..Read the Report:
