IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluating contract enforcement by courts in India: a litigant's lens


  • Pavithra Manivannan

    (XKDR Forum)

  • Susan Thomas

    (XKDR Forum and Jindal Global Business School)

  • Bhargavi Zaveri

    (National University of Singapore)


The literature on the performance evaluation of the judiciary captures the perspectives of judges, researchers and court administrators. However, it is not obvious if a litigant who proposes to access the judiciary for the resolution of a dispute would use the same or similar metrics when evaluating the performance of courts. In this paper, we review the global literature that evaluates the performance of the judiciary and identify which of the metrics in the literature would directly matter to a litigant who proposes to access the courts for redress. Using the litigant's expectations as performance metrics, we develop an evaluative framework for comparing similar courts. Our work creates the foundation for developing an information system that could potentially help litigants make informed choices when approaching courts.

Suggested Citation

  • Pavithra Manivannan & Susan Thomas & Bhargavi Zaveri, 2022. "Evaluating contract enforcement by courts in India: a litigant's lens," Working Papers 16, xKDR.
  • Handle: RePEc:anf:wpaper:16

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: First version, 2022
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Wasseem Mina, 2006. "Does contract enforcement matter for international lending?," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(6), pages 359-364.
    2. Giuliana Palumbo & Giulia Giupponi & Luca Nunziata & Juan S. Mora-Sanguinetti, 2013. "Judicial Performance and its Determinants: A Cross-Country Perspective," OECD Economic Policy Papers 5, OECD Publishing.
    3. William M. Landes, 1974. "An Economic Analysis of the Courts," NBER Chapters, in: Essays in the Economics of Crime and Punishment, pages 164-214, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Bernd Hayo & Stefan Voigt, 2008. "The Relevance of Judicial Procedure for Economic Growth," MAGKS Papers on Economics 200828, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    5. Juan S. Mora-Sanguinetti & Marta Martínez-Matute & Miguel García-Posada, 2017. "Credit, crisis and contract enforcement: evidence from the Spanish loan market," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 361-383, October.
    6. Messick, Richard E, 1999. "Judicial Reform and Economic Development: A Survey of the Issues," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank Group, vol. 14(1), pages 117-136, February.
    7. Katharina Pistor & Martin Raiser & Stanislaw Gelfer, 2000. "Law and Finance in Transition Economies," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 8(2), pages 325-368, July.
    8. Ulf von Lilienfeld‐Toal & Dilip Mookherjee & Sujata Visaria, 2012. "The Distributive Impact of Reforms in Credit Enforcement: Evidence From Indian Debt Recovery Tribunals," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(2), pages 497-558, March.
    9. Buscaglia, Edgardo & Ulen, Thomas, 1997. "A quantitative assessment of the efficiency of the judicial sector in Latin America," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 275-291, June.
    10. Damle, Devendra & Anand, Tushar, 2020. "Problems with the e-Courts data," Working Papers 20/314, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy.
    11. Chakraborty, Pavel, 2016. "Judicial quality and regional firm performance: The case of Indian states," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 902-918.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dimitrova-Grajzl, Valentina & Grajzl, Peter & Slavov, Atanas & Zajc, Katarina, 2016. "Courts in a transition economy: Case disposition and the quantity–quality tradeoff in Bulgaria," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 18-38.
    2. Peter Grajzl & Shikha Silwal, 2020. "The functioning of courts in a developing economy: evidence from Nepal," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 101-129, February.
    3. Dimitrova-Grajzl, Valentina & Grajzl, Peter & Sustersic, Janez & Zajc, Katarina, 2012. "Court output, judicial staffing, and the demand for court services: Evidence from Slovenian courts of first instance," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 19-29.
    4. Juan S. Mora-Sanguinetti & Marta Martínez-Matute, 2019. "An economic analysis of court fees: evidence from the Spanish civil jurisdiction," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 321-359, June.
    5. Fauvrelle Thiago A. & Tony C Almeida Alessio, 2018. "Determinants of Judicial Efficiency Change: Evidence from Brazil," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(1), pages 1-36, March.
    6. Virginia Rosales-López, 2008. "Economics of court performance: an empirical analysis," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 231-251, June.
    7. Samantha Bielen & Peter Grajzl & Wim Marneffe, 2017. "Understanding the Time to Court Case Resolution: A Competing Risks Analysis Using Belgian Data," CESifo Working Paper Series 6450, CESifo.
    8. Stefan Voigt, 2016. "Determinants of judicial efficiency: a survey," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 183-208, October.
    9. Saibal Ghosh, 2018. "Corporate investment and political federalism: does judicial efficiency matter?," Indian Economic Review, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 263-285, December.
    10. Frank B. Cross & Dain C. Donelson, 2010. "Creating Quality Courts," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(3), pages 490-510, September.
    11. Rizos, Anastasios & Kapopoulos, Panayotis, 2021. "Judicial Efficiency and Economic Growth: Evidence based on EU data," MPRA Paper 107861, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Miloš Božović, 2021. "Judicial efficiency and loan performance: micro evidence from Serbia," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 33-56, August.
    13. World Bank & International Finance Corporation, 2013. "Doing Business 2014 : Understanding Regulations for Small and Medium-Size Enterprises," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 16204, December.
    14. Falavigna, G. & Ippoliti, R., 2021. "Reform policy to increase the judicial efficiency in Italy: The opportunity offered by EU post-Covid funds," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 923-943.
    15. Jarosław Bełdowski & Łukasz Dąbroś & Wiktor Wojciechowski, 2020. "Judges and court performance: a case study of district commercial courts in Poland," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 171-201, August.
    16. Kim Economides & Alfred A. Haug & Joe McIntyre, 2013. "Are Courts Slow? Exposing and Measuring the Invisible Determinants of Case Disposition Time," Working Papers 1317, University of Otago, Department of Economics, revised Nov 2013.
    17. Korkeamaki, Timo & Koskinen, Yrjo & Takalo, Tuomas, 2007. "Phoenix rising: Legal reforms and changes in valuations in Finland during the economic crisis," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 33-58, April.
    18. Motta, Massimo & Polo, Michele, 2003. "Leniency programs and cartel prosecution," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 347-379, March.
    19. Polinsky, A. Mitchell & Shavell, Steven, 2007. "The Theory of Public Enforcement of Law," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 6, pages 403-454, Elsevier.
    20. Kathryn E. Spier, 2003. "“Tied to the Mast”: Most-Favored-Nation Clauses in Settlement Contracts," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(1), pages 91-120, January.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • K - Law and Economics
    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:anf:wpaper:16. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ami Dagli (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.