Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 376 (MP)

Vinod Devi v. Saroj Devi Gupta

2018-04-04

ANAND PATHAK

body2018
ORDER : 1. The instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioners/defendants against the order dated 07/02/2018 passed by 7th Additional District Judge, District-Morena in Appeal No.09-A/14 preferred at the instance of petitioners/defendants in which a direction has been given to the petitioners/appellants to submit Hindi translated copy of appeal memo. 2. Precisely stated facts of the case for adjudication are that a suit was filed by the respondents/plaintiffs for eviction and recovery of rent against the present petitioners/defendants. It appears that the trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 31/01/2014, decreed the suit filed by the plaintiffs under Section 12(1)(b) and 12 (1)(f) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the trial Court, appeal under Section 96 of CPC was preferred before the first appellate Court. It further appears that appeal was preferred in English language. Matter was pending for final arguments. Meanwhile, counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs prayed for translated copy of appeal memo in Hindi to facilitate the final arguments. Appellate Court directed the petitioners/defendants to submit Hindi translated copy of appeal memo on next date of hearing and matter was posted on 27/02/2018. On 27/02/2018 and thereafter, on 06/03/2018, Hindi translated copy was not provided therefore, the matter was adjourned. As per the submissions of the parties, matter is still pending for providing translated copy of appeal memo. Petitioners are aggrieved by the direction of the appellate Court by which translated copy of the appeal memo in Hindi (filed in English) has been directed to be supplied. 3. According to counsel for the petitioner, once the appeal was preferred in English at the time of final arguments, no such demand could have been raised by the respondents. This amounts to dilatory tactics since no objection was raised at the time of filing of the appeal. He prayed for setting aside the order passed by the first appellate Court. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents opposed the prayer made by the petitioners and submits that respondents including counsel appearing for the same are not well versed with the English language. As per the M.P. Civil Court Rules, 1961 a translated copy of appeal memo in Hindi is required to be provided. The appellate Court rightly passed the order under challenge. Petitioners can very well provide translated copy of the appeal. As per the M.P. Civil Court Rules, 1961 a translated copy of appeal memo in Hindi is required to be provided. The appellate Court rightly passed the order under challenge. Petitioners can very well provide translated copy of the appeal. He prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended with the petition. “Language appears to be one of the earliest inventions of Human Civilization, beside invention of Wheel and discovery of Fire.” 6. Part XVII of the Constitution of India deals in respect of “Official Language”, in which Chapter-I is in respect of language of the Union and as per Article 343 of the Constitution of India, language of the Union shall be in Hindi in Devanagari Script. Chapter-II of the same deals with Regional Languages under which Article 345 of the Constitution of India deals in respect of Official Language or the Languages of a State. 7. Section 3 of the M.P. Official Language Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred as “Act of 1957”), provided that Hindi shall be the Official Language of the State (Madhya Pradesh) for all purposes except such purposes as are specifically excluded by the Constitution and in respect of such matters as may be specified by Government from time to time by notifications. 8. After getting independence, sovereignty lies in People and reflection of the popular will reflected in Constitution. 9. Notification No.45940-FN.7(a)5-76B-XXI Dated 22/11/1976 published in M.P. Rajpatra (Ext.) dated 23/11/1976, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub Section (2) of Section 137 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, the State Government declares that with effect from the 26th January, 1977- (i) The Hindi in Devanagari script shall the language of the Courts subordinate to the High Court of M.P.; and (ii) The applications to and proceedings in such Courts shall be written in the Devanagari script. 10. For ready reference, Section 137(2) of CPC is reproduced as under:- “(2) The State Government may declare what shall be the language of any such Court and in what character applications to and proceedings in such Court shall be written.” 11. It appears that the State Government while issuing notification has laid its foundation on the basis of Section 3 of the Act of 1957, Section 137(2) of CPC and Article 345 of the Constitution of India. 12. It appears that the State Government while issuing notification has laid its foundation on the basis of Section 3 of the Act of 1957, Section 137(2) of CPC and Article 345 of the Constitution of India. 12. The said legislative intent is further reflected in subsequent enactment of M.P. Civil Courts Act, 1958 and Rules made thereunder i.e. M.P. Civil Court Rules, 1961. 13. Rule 8 of Rules of 1961 prescribes language of the Civil Courts in following terms :- “8. (a) Hindi written in Devnagari script shall be the language of the Civil Courts, subject to such exemption as may be notified by the State Government from time to time.” 14. Keeping the Constitutional, Statutory, Codified and Notified intent in juxtaposition to each other then it appears that part XVII of the Constitution (Official Language), section 3 (of the Act 1957) Section 137 (of CPC) and Rule 8 (of Rules under M.P. Civil Courts Rules, 1961) and notification (dated 23/11/1976) make it very clear that the official language of the Court other than High Court shall be Hindi. 15. Article 345 of the Constitution of India empowers the state legislature to adopt Hindi as Official Language of the State and accordingly it has been adopted in the State by passing the Act of 1957. Later on, notification dated 28/02/1963 and subsequent notification dated 22/11/1976 published in Gazette (Extraordinary) on 23/11/1976 notified that Hindi shall the language in all Subordinate Courts of the State. It further appears that the High Court of Madhya Pradesh by its memo dated 27/01/1977 directed all its subordinate Courts through its District and Sessions Judge to use and enforce Hindi in all its civil and criminal proceedings. 16. Once Rule 8 of the M.P. Civil Court Rules, 1961 also provided for Hindi, written in Devanagari Script as language of the Civil Court subject to such exemption as may be notified by the State Government from time to time then it became obvious that the appellate Court did not cause illegality when asked for Hindi translated copy of the appeal memo. The discussions made above is supported by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dr. Shiv Roop Sharma vs. R.K. Shrivastava , 1992 MPLJ 459 , therefore, this Court does not intend to tread on different path. 17. The discussions made above is supported by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dr. Shiv Roop Sharma vs. R.K. Shrivastava , 1992 MPLJ 459 , therefore, this Court does not intend to tread on different path. 17. Although, in the administration of Justice, Allegory/Statue of Justice is supreme and language cannot be a barrier in dispensation of justice. The said spirit is imbibed in the Fundamental Law of the land i.e. Constitution wherein under Article 350 (special directives) it has been expected that redressal of any grievance of a person can be made without language barrier. Justice (and its dispensation) is universal concept and cannot lie at the mercy of expression only, but with a caveat, that an advocate, being officer of the Court is equally expected to honour the Court language (Civil and Criminal Courts) as reflected through different enactments made in this regard. 18. Appellate Court did not err in demanding the translated copy of the appeal memo submitted in English language. Petitioners have to comply the order so passed, therefore, petition sans merits and the same is hereby dismissed. However, petitioners are at liberty to file translated copy of the appeal memo on next date of hearing so that appeal can be reach to a logical culmination at the earliest. 19. Petition stands dismissed.