IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/anf/wpaper/29.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluating courts from a litigant's perspective: A project report

Author

Listed:
  • Pavithra Manivannan

    (xKDR Forum)

  • Geetika Palta

    (xKDR Forum)

  • Susan Thomas

    (xKDR Forum)

  • Bhargavi Zaveri-Shah

    (xKDR Forum)

Abstract

Information systems about dispute resolution processes and forums that can aid litigants, a key stakeholder in the justice delivery system, are absent. We propose the development of a system that allows a litigant to comparatively evaluate the different forums where he can take his dispute for resolution. To develop this system, we first identify the types of information that can support the decision of a potential litigant on whether to take her matter to court and if yes, which court. We find that information on efficiency, effectiveness, fairness, predictability, and access to courts are crucial for a litigant's decision-making process. Subsequently, we locate data sources required to quantify such measures from the viewpoint of periodically publishing such measures in the public domain. For this purpose, the case type was narrowed down to debt disputes. We systematically collect quantifiable information about cases from the select courts' websites, namely, the Bombay High Court (Bombay HC), the Mumbai bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), and the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT). We use data from these courts up to September 2022. We find that a litigant has the lowest chance of getting a first hearing within the first year of filing a case at the Bombay HC (37%) as compared to the NCLT or the DRT. The chance for disposal within the first year is even slimmer. There is a 1/3rd chance of disposal at the NCLT within one year of filing, while it is less than 1/5th at both the Bombay HC and the DRT. However, a case is likely to have the highest number of hearings at the NCLT. A survey questionnaire is designed and deployed to capture features of a case that cannot be quantified. We deploy the survey to capture the relative performance of each of the three courts to a sample of respondents who have litigated frequently in the courts of our interest. The results of the survey indicate that the NCLT is ranked the highest by survey participants. Bombay HC comes second, and the DRT is ranked third.

Suggested Citation

  • Pavithra Manivannan & Geetika Palta & Susan Thomas & Bhargavi Zaveri-Shah, 2023. "Evaluating courts from a litigant's perspective: A project report," Working Papers 29, xKDR.
    • Handle: RePEc:anf:wpaper:29
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.xkdr.org/papers/2023Manivannanetal_evaluatingCourtsFromLitigantPerspectiveReport.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2023
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Pavithra Manivannan & Susan Thomas & Bhargavi Zaveri, 2022. "Evaluating contract enforcement by courts in India: a litigant's lens," Working Papers 16, xKDR.
    3. Wasseem Mina, 2006. "Does contract enforcement matter for international lending?," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(6), pages 359-364.
    4. Damle, Devendra & Anand, Tushar, 2020. "Problems with the e-Courts data," Working Papers 20/314, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy.
    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. Pavithra Manivannan & Susan Thomas & Bhargavi Zaveri, 2022. "Evaluating contract enforcement by courts in India: a litigant's lens," Working Papers 16, xKDR.
    2. Gabriel Madeira, 2014. "Legal enforcement, default and heterogeneity of project-financing contracts," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 569-602, November.
    3. Neupane, Biwesh & Thapa, Chandra & Marshall, Andrew & Neupane, Suman & Shrestha, Chaman, 2024. "Do foreign institutional investors improve board monitoring?," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    4. Abhay Aneja & Nirupama Kulkarni & S. K. Ritadhi, 2021. "Consumption Tax Reform and the Real Economy: Evidence From India's Adoption of a Value‐Added Tax," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(3), pages 569-602, September.
    5. Ongena, Steven & Cerqueiro, Geraldo & Roszbach, Kasper, 2016. "Collateral damage? On collateral, corporate financing and performance," Working Paper Series 1918, European Central Bank.
    6. Mina, Wasseem, 2012. "Beyond FDI: The Influence of Bilateral Investment Treaties on Debt," MPRA Paper 51920, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Ayyagari, Meghana & Beck, Thorsten & Hoseini, Mohammad, 2020. "Finance, law and poverty: Evidence from India," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    8. Hainz, Christa Maria & Danzer, Alexander, 2015. "Property rights, collateral and interest rates. Evidence from Vietnam," VfS Annual Conference 2015 (Muenster): Economic Development - Theory and Policy 112880, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    9. Decio Coviello & Andrea Ichino & Nicola Persico, 2019. "Measuring the Gains from Labor Specialization," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62(3), pages 403-426.
    10. Calomiris, Charles W. & Larrain, Mauricio & Liberti, José & Sturgess, Jason, 2017. "How collateral laws shape lending and sectoral activity," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(1), pages 163-188.
    11. Patnaik, Ila & Pandey, Radhika, 2020. "Moving to Inflation Targeting," Working Papers 20/316, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy.
    12. Nirupama Kulkarni & S.K. Ritadhi & Sayan Mukherjee, 2021. "Unearthing Zombies," Working Papers 59, Ashoka University, Department of Economics.
    13. Ramos Maqueda,Manuel & Chen,Daniel Li, 2021. "The Role of Justice in Development : The Data Revolution," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9720, The World Bank.
    14. Milonas, Kristoffer, 2017. "The effect of foreclosure laws on securitization: Evidence from U.S. states," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 1-22.
    15. Mina, Wasseem Michel, 2012. "The Institutional Reforms Debate and FDI Flows to the MENA Region: The “Best” Ensemble," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1798-1809.
    16. Baghai, Ramin P. & Becker, Bo, 2018. "Non-rating revenue and conflicts of interest," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(1), pages 94-112.
    17. Favara, Giovanni & Morellec, Erwan & Schroth, Enrique & Valta, Philip, 2017. "Debt enforcement, investment, and risk taking across countries," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(1), pages 22-41.
    18. Espinosa, Romain & Desrieux, Claudine & Ferracci, Marc, 2018. "Labor market and access to justice," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 1-16.
    19. Denyer Willis, Graham & Mota Prado, Mariana, 2014. "Process and Pattern in Institutional Reforms: A Case Study of the Police Pacifying Units (UPPs) in Brazil," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 232-242.
    20. Liang, Qing & Li, Zhaohua, 2022. "Debt enforcement and the cost of debt financing in M&As," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 47(PA).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods
    • C53 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Forecasting and Prediction Models; Simulation Methods
    • 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:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    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:29. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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: https://www.papers.xkdr.org/ .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.