HC Deb 19 November 1912 vol 44 cc94-5
3. Sir J. D. REES

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether, in the original hearing of the Midnapur case before Mr. Justice Fletcher, the Advocate-General thrice took the objection that the suit was time barred; whether Mr. Justice Fletcher nevertheless proceeded to hear the suit, and the Appellate Court decided, when reversing Mr. Justice Fletcher's judgment, that the Advocate-General's contention that the suit was barred was correct, and that the suit should have been dismissed in limine; and whether, in view of the expenditure of £10,000 in costs, and of 192 working days of the High Court's time, he will say what steps the Secretary of State intends to take to prevent the repetition of such an occurrence in the High Court of Calcutta?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Harold Baker)

The Court records are not before the Secretary of State, who is therefore not aware of the exact procedure followed with regard to the plea of limitation. But it would seem that Mr. Justice Fletcher decided to hear the plaintiff's evidence first and to hear afterwards the arguments on the point of limitation. A majority of the Appeal Bench found that the contention of the Advocate-General was correct. As regards the last part of the question, the reversal of judgments on appeal is a necessary incident in India as elsewhere.

Mr. J. D. REES

May I ask whether such an immense waste of time and money is an ordinary incident in any country, in England or in India, and whether the Secretary of State does not think this case calls for very serious notice and for some steps to prevent a recurrence?

Mr. SWIFT MacNEILL

Before that question is answered, may I ask if the hon. Gentleman is aware that the evidence given at that trial is most important as showing the relations between the Government officials and the natives in India?

Sir J. D. REES

Is it the function of a High Court to perform the function of a Royal Commission in India or to try cases?

Mr. H. BAKER

The Court records have not yet gone to the Secretary of State. I assured the hon. Member before that this matter would be carefully considered by the Secretary of State.

Back to