Adjournment

What is an Adjournment?

An **adjournment** is the postponement of a court hearing to a future date. When a case is "adjourned," it means the court has decided not to proceed on that particular day and has fixed a later date for the next hearing. Adjournments are a routine part of court proceedings but are also one of the most significant causes of delay in the Indian judicial system.

In everyday terms, when you go to court for a hearing and the case is not taken up or the hearing cannot be completed, the judge "adjourns" the matter to another date. The case is not decided that day — it is simply postponed. While individual adjournments may seem harmless, the cumulative effect of repeated adjournments over months and years is a primary reason why Indian litigation is notoriously slow.

Legal Framework

Order XVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Order XVII governs adjournments in civil proceedings.

Rule 1 — Power to Grant Adjournment

The court may, if sufficient cause is shown, at any stage of the suit, grant time to the parties or to any of them and may from time to time adjourn the hearing of the suit. However, the CPC imposes significant restrictions:

- **Proviso (a):** No adjournment shall be granted **more than three times** to a party during the hearing of the suit.

- **Proviso (b):** The court must record reasons for granting the adjournment.

- **Proviso (c):** The court may impose costs on the party seeking the adjournment, which shall be paid to the other party. If costs are not paid, the court may dismiss the suit or strike off the defence.

Rule 2 — Procedure When Sufficient Cause Not Shown

If, on the day fixed for hearing, the evidence or substantial portion of evidence of any party is not ready, the court may proceed to decide the suit forthwith if sufficient cause is not shown for the unpreparedness. The court is not obliged to grant an adjournment merely because a party asks for one.

Rule 3 — Court May Order Costs

The court may make such order as to costs occasioned by the adjournment as it thinks fit. Costs are a key deterrent against unnecessary adjournments.

2002 CPC Amendment — Stricter Approach

The CPC Amendment Act, 2002 introduced the three-adjournment cap and the mandatory recording of reasons, reflecting a legislative intent to curb the culture of adjournments in Indian courts. The Statement of Objects and Reasons emphasized that adjournments were a major cause of delay and that courts should be more disciplined in granting them.

Criminal Cases — BNSS, 2023

- **Section 346 BNSS (earlier Section 309 CrPC):** In every inquiry or trial, proceedings shall be continued from day to day until all witnesses in attendance have been examined, unless the court finds adjournment is necessary. The court must record reasons for adjournment and shall not ordinarily grant more than **two adjournments** to either party.

- The BNSS provisions are even stricter than the CPC, reflecting the urgency of criminal proceedings where the liberty of the accused may be at stake.

Supreme Court Guidelines

The Supreme Court has issued several directions on the subject of adjournments:

- In **Salem Advocate Bar Association v. Union of India (2005)**, the Court emphasized that courts must strictly enforce the adjournment provisions and that the practice of routinely granting adjournments must be curbed.

- In **Ramrameshwari Devi v. Nirmala Devi (2011)**, the Supreme Court held that courts must impose actual costs (not token costs) on parties seeking adjournments, and that heavy costs are necessary to discourage the practice.

Common Grounds for Adjournment

Adjournments are sought and granted for various reasons:

Legitimate Grounds

- **Absence of advocate due to engagement in another court** — This is the most common ground, though courts are increasingly reluctant to accept it as sufficient.

- **Illness of a party or advocate** — Supported by medical certificate.

- **Non-availability of a witness** — The witness has been summoned but has not appeared, and the party can show they made genuine efforts.

- **Settlement negotiations** — Parties are in the process of negotiating a settlement and need time.

- **Filing additional documents** — The court has allowed production of additional evidence.

- **Newly appointed advocate** — A fresh advocate has been engaged and needs time to study the case.

Grounds Courts Are Reluctant to Accept

- **Advocate's convenience** — Multiple adjournments for the advocate's personal convenience are frowned upon.

- **Unpreparedness without cause** — A party or advocate who is simply unprepared may face adverse consequences.

- **Delay tactics** — Where the court perceives that adjournments are being sought to deliberately delay the case, it may refuse and proceed.

Consequences of Adjournments

For the Litigation

- **Delay in justice** — Each adjournment adds weeks or months to the case. Over the life of a suit, repeated adjournments can result in years of delay.

- **Increased costs** — Every adjournment means additional visits to court, advocate fees, travel costs, and loss of working days for the litigant.

- **Fading of evidence** — As cases drag on, witnesses become unavailable, memories fade, and documents deteriorate.

Costs and Penalties

- **Costs to the other party** — The court may order the party seeking the adjournment to pay costs to the other party. These costs are meant to compensate for the inconvenience caused.

- **Dismissal of suit or striking off defence** — Under Order XVII Rule 1, if the party ordered to pay costs fails to do so, the court may dismiss the suit (if the plaintiff sought the adjournment) or strike off the defence (if the defendant sought it).

- **Adverse inference** — A party that repeatedly seeks adjournments may face adverse inferences about their intent to delay proceedings.

Practical Examples

**Example 1:** In a money recovery suit, the defendant's advocate seeks an adjournment on the date fixed for cross-examination of the plaintiff's witness, stating that the advocate is engaged in another High Court matter. The court grants the adjournment but imposes costs of Rs. 5,000 payable to the plaintiff within two weeks. This is the defendant's second adjournment.

**Example 2:** A criminal trial is at the evidence stage. The prosecution's key witness, a government official, does not appear despite summons. The prosecution seeks an adjournment to secure the witness's attendance. The court grants one adjournment but warns that if the witness does not appear next time, the court will proceed without that evidence under the BNSS provisions.

**Example 3:** In a family court matter, both parties inform the court that they are in mediation and are close to a settlement. They jointly request an adjournment of four weeks to allow mediation to conclude. The court grants the adjournment, directing the parties to file a status report on the mediation by the next date.

When Does This Term Matter?

- **Litigation strategy** — Understanding when adjournments are available and their limits is essential for planning court attendance, witness scheduling, and evidence preparation.

- **Cost implications** — Adjournments are not free. Courts increasingly impose costs, and the party seeking adjournments must be prepared to pay.

- **Speed of justice** — For litigants who want their cases resolved quickly, resisting unnecessary adjournments and opposing delay tactics by the other party is important.

- **Criminal cases** — In criminal matters, adjournments directly affect the accused's liberty (if they are in custody) and the victim's wait for justice. Courts are particularly strict about adjournments in criminal trials.

- **Commercial courts** — The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 imposes even stricter timelines, and adjournments in commercial suits are heavily restricted.

Frequently Asked Questions

How many adjournments can be granted in a civil case?

Under Order XVII Rule 1 of the CPC (as amended in 2002), no party shall be granted **more than three adjournments** during the hearing of the suit. However, this cap applies to adjournments sought by a party, not to adjournments caused by the court's own schedule (such as the judge being unavailable). In practice, courts have interpreted this provision with some flexibility, particularly for cases involving complex issues or multiple parties, but the three-adjournment limit is the general rule.

Can the court refuse an adjournment and proceed with the case?

Yes. The power to grant an adjournment is **discretionary**, not mandatory. If the court is not satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown, it may refuse the adjournment and proceed with the case. Under Order XVII Rule 2, if the evidence is not ready without sufficient cause, the court may decide the suit on the available material. If a party fails to appear, the court may proceed ex-parte. The court's discretion, however, must be exercised judicially and not arbitrarily.

What costs are imposed for adjournments?

Courts have wide discretion in imposing costs. In practice, costs range from a few hundred rupees to several thousand rupees per adjournment. The Supreme Court in **Ramrameshwari Devi v. Nirmala Devi (2011)** held that costs must be **realistic and actual**, not merely token amounts. Courts may consider the daily income of the affected party, the travel costs incurred, and the advocate's fees wasted. In commercial courts and High Courts, costs of Rs. 10,000 to Rs. 50,000 per adjournment are not uncommon.

Can an adjournment be challenged?

An order granting or refusing an adjournment is generally a **discretionary and procedural order** that is not independently appealable. However, if the refusal of an adjournment leads to an order on merits (such as an ex-parte decree), the aggrieved party can challenge the final order and argue that the refusal of adjournment was unjust and led to a miscarriage of justice. In exceptional cases, a party may approach the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution if the lower court's exercise of discretion was grossly unreasonable.