My Calm & Serene Office...
Some days at court don't go as planned — they go in circles. Today was one of those days.
Three matters sat on the cause list for the Kukatpally Courts:
- GWOP
- DVC
- STCIN — the cheque-bounce matter
As every litigator eventually learns, three matters on a cause list rarely means three straightforward hearings. More often it means three different courtrooms, a lot of back-and-forth, long stretches of uncertain waiting, and a lunch break that only arrives once your stomach has filed its own urgent motion.
Matter One: GWOP in the 6th ADJ Court on 4th floor
The day began with the GWOP matter.
Stage: Notice
Appearing for: Petitioner
Nothing dramatic. At least, not yet.
The notice had not been served.
When the matter was called, I stood up, introduced myself as counsel for the petitioner, and added that my client was present.
Usual work but felt like a good start.
In litigation, having your client present in court is more than just a formality. It quietly reflects their sincerity and seriousness towards the proceedings—and that is something a judge is likely to notice.
I asked the obvious question:
“Has the notice been served?”
The answer came without ceremony.
“No.”
And just like that, there wasn't much left to say.
No heated submissions. No legal fireworks. No courtroom battle.
Just the next date.
I took it down and stepped aside.
One court down. Two more to go.
So far, the morning was behaving itself.
Or so I thought.
I had no idea then that the real story of the day was waiting for me in the next courtroom.
Matter Two: The DVC Matter
Next I hurried over to the 9th Court on 3rd floor for the DVC case — and this one had more going on.
Stage: Notice
Appearing For :- Petitioner
The respondent had earlier filed an RCR petition in the 6th ADJ Court, then seemingly lost interest and stopped showing up. That case was dismissed for default.
Meanwhile, in the DVC matter, the respondent had also vacated his rented apartment. The notice sent to that address bounced back. So we tried his residential address instead — and that came back too, marked with a rather blunt remark: "No such person exists there."
At this point it seems that the respondent had developed a real gift for becoming geographically untraceable. He'd left his rental, and his own residence had apparently been let out to someone else. Nobody could say where he actually lived.
So we filed a memo asking the Court either to permit service at his office, or to let us proceed ex parte with the evidence.
This is where a small lesson landed for me as a young lawyer: when summons might end up at someone's workplace — somewhere it could genuinely embarrass them — it's better to seek the Court's permission first, rather than just going ahead on our own.
The Court recorded its permission and gave us a date in November.
A small procedural win — and one less court to chase for the rest of the day.
Matter Three: STCIN
From there, it was on to the 10th Court for the STCIN cheque-bounce matter.
Stage: Withdrawl
Appearing For :- Complainant
I arrived to find the Bench empty. No judge.
But, oddly enough, the calling-up work carried on regardless. The presiding judge had been transferred, and until a replacement took charge, pending matters kept being called and pushed to fresh dates. Court work, it turns out, keeps moving even without anyone on the Bench.
When my case was called, I asked the Bench Clerk whether both parties needed to be present to file a withdrawal memo — my client had received the full cheque amount from the respondent and wanted to withdraw the case.
Yes, the Clerk said. Both parties would need to be there.
He handed us a fresh date.
Then came a piece of free advice from a fellow advocate in the corridor: even on the new date, the judge probably still wouldn't be there, so the matter likely wouldn't wrap up then either.
Which sums up a strange truth about litigation: a case can be listed, called, and adjourned to a new date — and the one person the hearing actually needs might not even be in the building.
There was a quieter lesson in this matter too. I'd assumed a withdrawal memo, once both sides had settled, would be a quick formality. It isn't — procedural steps like this often carry requirements, such as both parties being physically present, that are easy to overlook until you actually ask. It's a good reminder to check the "how" of a step before assuming it'll be a formality.
Three Matters Down. Technically.
With the day's listed matters "done," I headed back to the 6th ADJ Court, where a senior of mine was appearing in a separate GWOP matter for the same petitioner of my DVC case. I stayed on to assist.
Stage: Marking of evidence
Appearing For :- Petitioner
And then came the waiting.
That matter was listed for further evidence and its marking. So we waited. And waited. And waited a bit more.
By around 2:00 p.m., the judge finally rose for lunch — which meant our matter would only be taken up afterward.
By then, our stomachs had stopped politely growling and moved on to making submissions of their own. The canteen suddenly mattered more than the courtroom. We ate in record time, with the focused urgency of people who'd survived the morning on court air alone, then rushed back.
2:31 p.m. — The Moment of Truth
At 2:31 p.m., our matter was finally called.
Another lesson for a young lawyer: when your matter is likely to be called, be there. Court doesn't wait for you to finish your tea, your conversation, or a trip to the washroom. Your moment can arrive exactly when you're not looking.
We asked for the evidence marking to proceed.
"Petitioner present?" the Bench Clerk asked.
My senior answered immediately that she was in the lift and on her way — and she was. By the time the matter concluded, she'd just reached the courtroom door.
The judge nodded. For one brief moment, it seemed our four-hour wait might actually pay off.
Then came the twist: the judge decided to give the respondent one more opportunity to file a counter, instead of proceeding with the evidence marking.
And just like that — four and a half hours of waiting, rushing, sitting, standing, starving, eating in a hurry, and waiting again — amounted to nothing.
No evidence marking. No progress. Just another opportunity. Another date.
Sitting through this matter with my senior taught me something that no textbook covers: you can do everything right — track the matter, stay present, show up the moment you're called — and the outcome can still turn on a factor entirely outside your control, like the Court's own discretion to give the other side one more chance. Watching how calmly my senior absorbed that outcome, without frustration or drama, was its own kind of lesson.
The Takeaway
Perhaps this is one of those things a young litigator learns not from a textbook, but from a court corridor:
In litigation, patience isn't a virtue. It's a professional requirement.
After a day spent in the hustle and rush of court premises, I finally made it back to my calm and serene office—and on a day like this, the quiet of one's own chair feels like a small luxury.
With that, I’m winding up my Court Diary for today.
The court day may be over, but the diary continues—with another cause list, another courtroom, and, I’m sure, another story.
Until then…
The story pauses here… until we turn the next page together.
— Anu
Spill. Stir. Stay tuned As Not all drama belongs in court.
Disclaimer: This article narrates my personal experience as an advocate. The procedural steps discussed are based on the directions passed by the Court in these case.
#CourtDiary #LawyerLife #LawyerDiaries #LifeOfALawyer #LitigationLife #IndianLawyer #IndianCourts #CourtLife #CourtroomStories #LegalStories #LegalJourney #HyderabadLawyer #HyderabadCourts #TelanganaCourts #LitigationInIndia
No comments:
Post a Comment