Based on a slightly true case.
Dispute arose between two neighbors
One said it was Monday
The other said it was Sunday
Together they went to court
And engaged best lawyers of bar
One became Plaintiff’s lawyer
The other became Defendant’s Lawyer
Plaintiff pleaded it was Monday
Defendant denied the claim
And insisted for heavy burden
On plaintiff to prove his case
Lawyers on both side
Led evidence oral and documentary
But none produced a calendar before court
To see what the day it was
Evidence was examined
Precedents were seen
Arguments were heard for days
And finally the court held
Plaintiff had failed to prove his case
And suit was dismissed
A shooting pain rose in heart of plaintiff
‘How court denied his case
when every calendar in town
showed it was Monday!’
Is there darkness in our justice system!
What kind of justice is this!
His heart cried.
He vowed to fight up to Supreme Court
And lawyers on both sides agreed too
-2-
The matter remained pending in High Court,
For almost fifteen years!
High Court said Trial Court was right in
saying this it was Sunday!
-3-
After fifteen years
When matter came to Supreme Court
Plaintiff’s counsel humbly urged
“ There is no judgement of Supreme Court
as to at what point a day begins
and at what point night ends:
Unless the law is cleared by Supreme Court on this issue,
It cannot be decided whether it was Monday or Sunday!
The enior Counsel urged this point involves large number of cases,
pending in various courts!
The bench smiled and granted leave.
Matter remained Supreme Court for five years.
4
After five years when matter was heard
The another bench smiled and said,
“Concurrent findings of all courts
and hence no question of interference!”
Plaintiff’s lawyer(me) in Supreme Court
urged, and begged,
please see this calendar!
It clearly shows it was Monday and Not Sunday
as held by all courts below!
The Supreme Court Bench said,
“Here we can’t see new evidences!
Here we can’t see photographs of actual position on ground!
Here we can’t see CC TV phootage to know truth.
We don’t see TV!
We don’t read newspapers!
We have to go by strict rules!
We have to go by what is record of case only.
No New Evidence Here!!!!!!!!
5
Plaintiff’s Lawyer (me) in Supreme Court,
Advised his client
“File another fresh suit
This time ask your lawyer to file calendar”
and returned papers by post
back to the plaintiff
Unfortunately,
The postman lost file in transit,
And the case came to an end
And in all these years of suit life,
The lawyers had moved
From rented premises to bunglows
And their sons had entered at Bar
To fight a fresh suits for neighbors
If they were still not sure
Whether it was Sunday or Monday!
-3
6
According to an eminent jurist (me)
The first court was guilty
Of deciding an issue without sufficient data,
And of not refusing to grant a judgement
Though it had right to refuse judgement
unless calendar was filed by either side advocate.
And the last court (Supreme Court) was guilty
Of admitting matter with right hand
And dismissing it with left hand,
And of not realizing that Supreme Court
was the last opportunity for a man to get justice done!
And the lawyers were of course not guilty of Anything
As they were just doing their duty
To educate their children
And to settle them in profession
The postman was also a great culprit
Who lost the case papers in transit
Particularly when two neighbours
Are still not sure what the day it is!
Had he not lost papers,
Today my son would have been arguing
the same case with latest knowledge of Law!
Alas! The fleets of years glide on,
And I never saw my client again.
Alas! Alas!
Haresh Raichura
Note:
1. The poem is based on an actual case with slightly different facts. The fact of postman losing returned case papers is completely true.
2. Impression of a Judge’s right to Refuse Judgement is based on refusal of Justice Whittaker to participate in judgement, in Baker V Carr 369 US 186 (1962) as mentioned in Constitutional Law- A Political Case Book, by Jerome R Corsi and Mathew Ross Lippman on page 24
3. This poem was composed on Friday, March 19, 2004 and is published in my book,
Tomato Soup for Judges and Lawyers.
Based on a slightly true case.
Dispute arose between two neighbors
One said it was Monday
The other said it was Sunday
Together they went to court
And engaged best lawyers of bar
One became Plaintiff’s lawyer
The other became Defendant’s Lawyer
Plaintiff pleaded it was Monday
Defendant denied the claim
And insisted for heavy burden
On plaintiff to prove his case
Lawyers on both side
Led evidence oral and documentary
But none produced a calendar before court
To see what the day it was
Evidence was examined
Precedents were seen
Arguments were heard for days
And finally the court held
Plaintiff had failed to prove his case
And suit was dismissed
A shooting pain rose in heart of plaintiff
‘How court denied his case
when every calendar in town
showed it was Monday!’
Is there darkness in our justice system!
What kind of justice is this!
His heart cried.
He vowed to fight up to Supreme Court
And lawyers on both sides agreed too
-2-
The matter remained pending in High Court,
For almost fifteen years!
High Court said Trial Court was right in
saying this it was Sunday!
-3-
After fifteen years
When matter came to Supreme Court
Plaintiff’s counsel humbly urged
“ There is no judgement of Supreme Court
as to at what point a day begins
and at what point night ends:
Unless the law is cleared by Supreme Court on this issue,
It cannot be decided whether it was Monday or Sunday!
The enior Counsel urged this point involves large number of cases,
pending in various courts!
The bench smiled and granted leave.
Matter remained Supreme Court for five years.
4
After five years when matter was heard
The another bench smiled and said,
“Concurrent findings of all courts
and hence no question of interference!”
Plaintiff’s lawyer(me) in Supreme Court
urged, and begged,
please see this calendar!
It clearly shows it was Monday and Not Sunday
as held by all courts below!
The Supreme Court Bench said,
“Here we can’t see new evidences!
Here we can’t see photographs of actual position on ground!
Here we can’t see CC TV phootage to know truth.
We don’t see TV!
We don’t read newspapers!
We have to go by strict rules!
We have to go by what is record of case only.
No New Evidence Here!!!!!!!!
5
Plaintiff’s Lawyer (me) in Supreme Court,
Advised his client
“File another fresh suit
This time ask your lawyer to file calendar”
and returned papers by post
back to the plaintiff
Unfortunately,
The postman lost file in transit,
And the case came to an end
And in all these years of suit life,
The lawyers had moved
From rented premises to bunglows
And their sons had entered at Bar
To fight a fresh suits for neighbors
If they were still not sure
Whether it was Sunday or Monday!
-3
6
According to an eminent jurist (me)
The first court was guilty
Of deciding an issue without sufficient data,
And of not refusing to grant a judgement
Though it had right to refuse judgement
unless calendar was filed by either side advocate.
And the last court (Supreme Court) was guilty
Of admitting matter with right hand
And dismissing it with left hand,
And of not realizing that Supreme Court
was the last opportunity for a man to get justice done!
And the lawyers were of course not guilty of Anything
As they were just doing their duty
To educate their children
And to settle them in profession
The postman was also a great culprit
Who lost the case papers in transit
Particularly when two neighbours
Are still not sure what the day it is!
Had he not lost papers,
Today my son would have been arguing
the same case with latest knowledge of Law!
Alas! The fleets of years glide on,
And I never saw my client again.
Alas! Alas!
Haresh Raichura
Note:
1. The poem is based on an actual case with slightly different facts. The fact of postman losing returned case papers is completely true.
2. Impression of a Judge’s right to Refuse Judgement is based on refusal of Justice Whittaker to participate in judgement, in Baker V Carr 369 US 186 (1962) as mentioned in Constitutional Law- A Political Case Book, by Jerome R Corsi and Mathew Ross Lippman on page 24
3. This poem was composed on Friday, March 19, 2004 and is published in my book,
“Tomato Soup for Judges and Lawyers”.I am also looking for publisher.
Haresh A. Raichura 