Krishnendra has 2 years of experience in Content and Copywriting. He realised the value of persuasive writing while working with LawSikho. Writing a few marketing emails taught him that right wordings create the right impact. Reading The Boron Letters by advertising legend Gary Halbert inspired him to keep learning about the craft of writing.
He does not restrict himself to legal content writing alone. He has written content for clients in the SaaS Industry and Personal development Industry.
He believes in writing for multi niches to enhance his creativity and train his writing muscle.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday strongly expressed its displeasure when a lawyer did not speak up timely in a virtual hearing. The said hearing concerns a special leave petition in the matter of M/S Dilip Buildcon v. M/S Topworth Infra Pvt Ltd.
The Three-Judge Bench comprising of Justices Rohinton, Fali Nariman and Navin Sinha cautioned advocates from taking advantage of a non-physical hearing setup.
“We strongly deprecate tactics of this kind. We do not want advocates to take advantage of a non-physical hearing system when it is working on both sides”, it said.
The top Court insisted that the lawyer could have informed the Bench that he is waiting for the senior advocate instead of resorting to such tactics. It categorically made the following observations in this regard.
“Despite the fact that the mike was on and despite the fact that he was told by the court at least three times that he should open his mouth, he purposely did not do so, because he was waiting for a Senior Advocate. He should have come upfront with the court and informed the court that he was waiting for the Senior Advocate instead of indulging in tactics of this kind.”
However, the hearing did take place eventually. The apex Court dismissed the case as it did not want to interfere with the High Court’s order.
SC is presently hearing cases in a virtual setup due to its restricted functioning amidst the COVID 19 pandemic.
Reports suggest that the lawyer did not know that his case was being called out and missed out responding in time due to confusion.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in the article above are those of the authors' and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of this publishing house