This new LAOT series seeks to demystify High Court procedure for young lawyers, litigants, and law students entering the profession. Through court-specific installments focused on different High Courts, the series aims to bridge the gap between written procedural rules and lived courtroom practice, making the everyday functioning of High Courts more accessible and intelligible.
Navigating the procedural journey of a case in the Karnataka High Court can feel overwhelming, especially for young lawyers or litigants unfamiliar with the unwritten conventions of the court. From filing a listing memo to clearing registry objections, every step involves its own set of practices. This guide walks through the process in a simple, practical manner.
Filing and Process of Listing
After a case is filed in the High Court of Karnataka, the usual course for getting the matter listed is by mentioning it through a listing memo, especially if there is urgency. The listing memo is filed before the concerned roster judge who will hear the matter. However, there is no standard practice for how such memos are accepted; they are usually accepted at the judge’s discretion. While some judges do not require counsel to mention the matter (that is, make very brief submissions on the nature of the matter and why it should be listed) and instead directly accept the memos through the court’s court master, other judges require counsel to mention the matter and explain the urgency.
Scrutiny and Defects
If a memo is accepted, it is sent to the scrutiny branch of the High Court, which is in charge of scrutinizing petitions or appeals for defects in filing.
Common defects include:
1. Questions about the court’s jurisdiction
2. Insufficient or incorrect court fees
3. Illegible or improperly arranged documents
Counsel are required to clear the defects before the matter is taken up for hearing before the concerned roster judge. However, sometimes, if urgency is established, the matter may be taken up even if there are defects in the filing, with the understanding that the defects shall be cleared later.
Registry Review and Registrar Court
Usually, after the registry scrutinizes the papers and identifies defects, the file is sent to the Registrar Court for listing. Often, the Registrar grants some time to clear the defects notified. If defects are not cleared despite time being granted by the Registrar, the file is sent to the concerned roster judge for listing for hearing on the objections raised by the Registry. These cases are listed under the category “Orders”. Again, in most cases the court grants time to clear objections. Sometimes (for example, on questions of jurisdiction), counsel are permitted to make submissions on why such objections should be overruled. Based on counsel’s submissions, the court may choose to overrule the objection or direct counsel to rectify the defect.
Roster and Bench Assignment
Matters are broadly assigned to benches (either sitting singly or as a division bench) by the Chief Justice of the High Court based on the subject matter and sometimes the year of filing. The “roster” (that is, the assignment of types of matters) is usually changed every six weeks, but the frequency of change is entirely left to the Chief Justice’s discretion.
Daily Cause Lists
After defects are cleared, the matter is sent to the concerned roster judge for hearing. Daily, a list of cases called the Cause List is prepared to be taken up by a court. The Cause List is released either the previous evening or a few days prior. In most cases, courts hear anywhere between two to three lists, sometimes more. The kind of matters in each list depends on the roster judge. For example, some judges hear urgent matters in List 2, while others hear matters relating to Office Objections (raised by the registry as mentioned above) in List 2. Similarly, sometimes matters that are filed in the morning and are to be listed on the same day can be found in List 3 or 4, depending on the number of lists that particular court has for that day.
Listing and Categorization
Fresh writ petitions are listed under the category “Preliminary Hearing”. If notice is issued by the court on the writ petition, and after process fee is paid, the counter party is notified to appear before the court to be heard. Writ petitions where notice has been issued are then listed under the category “Preliminary Hearing B Group”. If a party chooses to file an interlocutory application in the matter, then it is listed under the category “Hearing on IA”.
Similarly, after defects are cleared in appeals, they are listed under the category “Admission”. As in the case of petitions, if applications are filed along with the appeal, the matter is listed under the category “Hearing on IA”.
Sometimes, if arguments have been addressed by parties extensively, the matter is listed under the category “For Hearing” or “Final Hearing” if the matter is to be finally heard and disposed of. In rare cases where a matter has to be heard after disposal (usually for clarifications or rectifying minor defects in the court’s orders), the matters are listed under the category “For Being Spoken To”.
Conclusion: –
The journey from filing to final hearing is rarely linear. It involves coordination with the Registry, awareness of roster changes, and constant monitoring of the Cause List. While written rules provide the framework, much of High Court practice is shaped by convention and the working style of individual judges.
For lawyers, mastering these procedural nuances is as important as knowing the law itself. Understanding the system not only helps in effective advocacy but also ensures that urgent matters receive timely attention.
Bio: Vishwajith Sadananda is Founder & Lead Counsel at Sadananda & Prasad, Advocates
Credits: This series is planned,coordinated and edited by Jeetendra Vishwakarma. This is published by Tamanna Yadav and social media was designed by Nivedita from the LAOT team,
