Open Access Research Article
INDIAN JUDICIARY’S STANCE ON VIRTUAL HEARINGS AND SERVICE OF SUMMONS VIA ELECTRONIC MEANS UNDER THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908
Published Paper
Article Details
INDIAN
JUDICIARY’S STANCE ON VIRTUAL HEARINGS AND SERVICE OF SUMMONS VIA ELECTRONIC
MEANS UNDER THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908
AUTHORED BY - GAUREEKA NATH
3rd Year BBA LLB
School of Law, CHRIST (Deemed to be
University), Bengaluru
ABSTRACT
The Indian judiciary has undergone a
swift digital transformation, particularly expedited by the COVID-19 pandemic,
resulting in a notable transition towards virtual hearings and the electronic
delivery of summons as stipulated by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908[1].
This abstract investigates the evolving perspective of the Indian judiciary
regarding these practices, examining significant judicial rulings and
legislative changes that have influenced their application. While virtual
hearings provide improved accessibility and efficiency, there remain concerns
about procedural fairness, digital literacy, and cybersecurity[2].
Similarly, although the electronic service of summons is legally acknowledged,
it encounters challenges concerning proof of delivery and authenticity[3].
This analysis delves into the judiciary's endeavours to reconcile technological
progress with the essential tenets of natural justice and due process,
emphasizing the ongoing dialogue surrounding the incorporation of digital tools
within the established framework of civil procedure in India[4].
KEYWORDS:
Virtual hearing, Digital literacy, Procedural fairness, Due process, and
Electronic Service of Summons
INTRODUCTION
Virtual Courts represent an
innovative approach designed to eliminate the necessity for litigants or
lawyers to physically attend court proceedings, allowing for the adjudication
of cases through a virtual platform[5].
This concept has been developed to optimize the use of court resources and to
offer litigants a practical means of resolving minor disputes[6]. A
Judge can oversee Virtual Court proceedings via an electronic platform, with
jurisdiction potentially covering the entire State and operating around the
clock[7].
Both the litigant and the Judge can engage in the process without the need for
physical court appearances, as all communication occurs electronically.
Sentencing, as well as the payment of fines or compensation, can also be
conducted online[8]. These
courts are particularly suited for cases where the accused admits guilt or the
defendant complies with the summons received electronically. Such cases may be
considered resolved upon the payment of the fine.
The emergence of the digital era has
significantly influenced legal systems across the globe, necessitating a
reassessment of established procedural standards. In India, the COVID-19
pandemic acted as a driving force for the swift integration of virtual hearings
and electronic service of summons, compelling the judiciary to adopt
technological solutions to maintain the flow of justice[9].
This paper explores the changing perspective of the Indian judiciary regarding
these practices, framed within the context of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
(CPC), and evaluates important judicial decisions, legislative changes, and the
obstacles faced during their execution[10].
Virtual Hearings: A Paradigm Shift
The shift to virtual hearings marks a
significant transformation in India's judicial system. The Supreme Court, in
response to the pandemic, issued guidelines promoting video conferencing to
ensure continued access to justice. This shift is not just a temporary measure
but a step toward making courts more efficient and accessible (Supreme Court
Guidelines, 2020)[11].
Judicial pronouncements have played a
key role in shaping this transition. In Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of
India (2018), the Court upheld the principle of open justice, paving the
way for technology in courtrooms[12].
During the pandemic, various High Courts introduced their own virtual hearing
protocols, further reinforcing this shift. Additionally, in In Re: Guidelines
for Court Functioning Through Video Conferencing During COVID-19 Pandemic,
the Supreme Court underscored the necessity of virtual hearings to maintain
judicial efficiency[13].
Bridging the Digital Divide: The
Courts’ Adaptation to Virtual Justice
The transition to virtual hearings
has been a necessity, not just an innovation. Before the pandemic, appearing in
court often meant long journeys, financial strain, and lost time. Virtual
hearings have changed that, making legal proceedings more accessible. However,
this shift has not been without challenges. Issues such as unreliable internet
connections, lack of digital literacy, and difficulty in assessing witness
credibility have raised concerns (Iyer, 2021)[14].
A major transformation has been the electronic
service of summons. Traditionally delivered by court officials, summons can now
be sent via email and messaging apps. While this is faster and cost-effective,
it raises concerns about accessibility for those unfamiliar with technology or
lacking regular internet access (Sharma, 2020)[15].
Courts have addressed this by requiring clear proof of delivery and offering
alternatives like physical service where needed.
Virtual hearings have made justice
more inclusive for people in remote areas, those with disabilities, and those
facing financial hardships. However, challenges remain. The principle of open
court proceedings, ensuring transparency and fairness, takes on new meaning
in a digital setting. Technical glitches, cybersecurity threats, and digital
exclusion pose risks to the integrity of virtual courts (Desai, 2022)[16].
Despite these hurdles, the goal
remains clear—leveraging technology to make justice more efficient without
compromising fairness. The Indian judiciary continues to navigate this evolving
landscape, striving for a balance between innovation and accessibility.
Literature
Review
This literature review explores the
evolving landscape of virtual hearings and electronic service of summons within
the Indian judicial system, focusing on the interplay between technological
advancements and established legal principles. It examines scholarly discourse,
judicial pronouncements, and legislative amendments to understand the current
stance of the Indian judiciary.
The Advent of Digitalization and its
Impact on Legal Procedures
The integration of technology into
the Indian judicial system has been a gradual process, beginning with efforts
to digitize court records and streamline case management systems. Scholars
emphasize the potential of technology to enhance efficiency and transparency
within the judiciary (Singh, 2015)[17].
Early discussions on this subject were primarily centered around the practical
aspects of digitization rather than the transformation of court proceedings
themselves.
However, the COVID-19 pandemic
dramatically accelerated the adoption of virtual hearings and electronic
service of summons. The Indian judiciary was compelled to shift to online
proceedings almost overnight, leading to both challenges and new opportunities
(Kumar, 2021)[18]. Legal
journals and academic publications rapidly examined the implications of this
shift on procedural fairness and judicial efficiency.
Legal Framework and Judicial
Interpretations
The legal foundation for electronic
service of summons and virtual hearings in India is primarily derived from the Code
of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) and the Information Technology Act, 2000.
Order V Rule 10A of the CPC allows for electronic service of summons, while the
IT Act provides a broader framework for the legal validity of digital
communications (Sharma, 2020)[19].
Many scholars analyze these acts by assessing their legislative intent and
identifying areas for improvement in judicial accessibility.
Judicial interpretations of virtual
hearings have played a crucial role in shaping their legitimacy. Swapnil
Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India (2018) laid the groundwork for
live-streaming of court proceedings, reinforcing the principles of open justice
(Gupta, 2019)[20].
Supreme Court and High Court guidelines, particularly those issued during the
pandemic, have been widely discussed as a reference for assessing the
effectiveness of virtual proceedings. High Court rulings have varied
significantly across India, leading to inconsistencies in implementation.
A critical concern in the legal
discourse surrounding virtual hearings is their impact on due process and
natural justice. Scholars debate whether digital proceedings uphold fair
trial principles, particularly for those with limited technological access
(Reddy, 2022)[21]. Many
articles highlight the risks posed by the digital divide, which
disproportionately affects marginalized groups within the legal system.
Practical Challenges and
Considerations
Despite its advantages, the shift to
virtual hearings presents several challenges. One of the most pressing is the digital
divide and accessibility. Research highlights disparities in technological
access and their impact on judicial participation (Iyer, 2021)[22].
While urban practitioners may adapt easily, rural litigants often lack stable
internet connections and digital literacy, raising concerns about equitable
participation.
Another critical issue is cybersecurity
and data privacy. With court proceedings and documents stored on digital
platforms, the risk of data breaches has increased (Desai, 2022)[23].
Concerns about hacking, data manipulation, and surveillance have led to calls
for stronger cybersecurity protocols and encrypted communication systems.
Beyond security, procedural
efficiency and effectiveness are central to discussions on virtual
hearings. Some studies argue that digital proceedings improve efficiency by
reducing delays and costs, while others highlight challenges such as the
diminished ability to assess witness credibility and the lack of persuasive
in-person argumentation (Patel, 2020)[24].
Legal
Provisions & Recent Cases
The serving of
summons is an essential procedural requirement under the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 (CPC), [25]which
ensures that a party is properly informed of the legal action taken against
them. Historically, summons were delivered through personal handover,
registered mail, or public announcements. However, due to technological
advancements and the growing digitization of legal procedures, Indian courts
have started to accept electronic methods as a legitimate way of serving
summons. This change gained momentum during the COVID-19 pandemic, which
underscored the importance of digital communication in legal matters. The move
towards electronically serving summons is intended to enhance efficiency,
decrease delays, and improve accessibility. Nonetheless, this transition has
also raised issues regarding the legal soundness, evidential significance, and
practical challenges associated with digital summons service. The subsequent
section explores the legal framework regulating electronic service of summons
in India, along with significant judicial decisions confirming its legitimacy.
Legal
Provisions under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
The Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908, outlines a systematic approach for delivering summons,
ensuring that parties are informed about legal actions against them. Recent
updates and court rulings have enabled the use of electronic methods, like
email, WhatsApp, and other digital platforms, as legitimate means of service.
Order V Rule 9 of the CPC was revised to explicitly permit electronic service,
on the condition that there is adequate proof of service available. This rule
acknowledges that summons can be served via email, SMS, WhatsApp, or other
digital channels, provided there is confirmation of receipt. Likewise, Order V
Rule 10 states that summons may be served in person, through an agent, or by
any other lawful means, thus allowing for electronic service.
Moreover, Order
V Rule 19A states that summons may be delivered via registered post, speed
post, or courier. Judicial interpretations of this rule have broadened its
scope to include electronic methods, as long as delivery receipts or
acknowledgments are serving as evidence. Additionally, Section 27 of the
General Clauses Act, 1897,[26]
establishes that if a document is correctly addressed and sent through an
accepted communication method, it is assumed to have been delivered
appropriately. Courts have used this presumption to validate the service of
summons rendered electronically, as long as there is proof of delivery, such as
a read receipt or acknowledgment.
In addition to
the CPC, the Information Technology Act, 2000,[27]
plays a significant role in endorsing electronic communication in legal
processes. Section 4 of the IT Act indicates that if a law demands a document
to be in written form, this requirement can be satisfied through an electronic
record. Furthermore, Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872[28],
permits electronic records to be accepted as evidence in court, reinforcing the
argument for the digital service of summons. These provisions together form the
legal foundation for serving summons electronically, ensuring that procedural
fairness is upheld while adapting to technological progress.
Judicial
Precedents
Numerous
significant cases have influenced the judiciary's view on the legitimacy and
efficacy of electronic service of summons. In the case of KSL and Industries
Ltd. v. Mannalal Khandelwal (2005),[29]
the Bombay High Court acknowledged the electronic service of legal notices
under the IT Act, establishing a precedent for its application in judicial
summons. Likewise, in Tata Sons Ltd. v. John Doe (2013),[30]
the Delhi High Court allowed for the service of summons through email and
social media, recognizing the changing landscape of digital communication.
In the Supreme
Court case Central Electricity Regulatory Commission v. National Hydroelectric
Power Corporation (2010),[31] it
was confirmed that if an electronic notice is sent and the recipient
acknowledges it, this constitutes valid service under the CPC. This ruling
solidified the legal standing of electronic service and emphasized that proof
of acknowledgment is essential for its validation. A more recent judgment, SBI
Cards & Payment Services Pvt. Ltd. v. Rohidas Jadhav (2021),[32]
further reinforced the judiciary's position by affirming that dispatching
summons via WhatsApp was legitimate if supported by a "blue tick" or
delivery acknowledgment. This decision clarified that the recipient's
acknowledgment, whether through read receipts or email confirmations, is a
critical factor in establishing the validity of digital summons.
Another notable
ruling is Indian Bank v. Satyam Fibres (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2022),[33]
where the Supreme Court determined that in situations where the defendant
evades physical service, courts may instruct the use of electronic methods,
provided that the digital evidence of service is available for validation. This
ruling tackled the frequent issue of parties evading service and offered a
legal avenue to ensure that summons are effectively delivered. Altogether,
these judicial precedents illustrate a forward-thinking approach by Indian
courts in accepting digital modes of service while upholding procedural
fairness and compliance with due process requirements.
Analysis
Although the
electronic service of summons presents certain advantages, it also encounters
numerous challenges that must be tackled for successful implementation. A
primary concern involves proof of delivery; many digital platforms lack
dependable confirmation of receipt, and features such as disabling read
receipts on applications like WhatsApp create uncertainty about whether the
summons was actually seen. This uncertainty can result in disputes over service
and hinder legal proceedings. Another
major issue is the digital divide; while individuals in urban areas often enjoy
seamless electronic communication, many people, particularly those in rural
locations, may lack access to smartphones, email, or dependable internet
service. This situation raises concerns about equal access and the fundamental
right to a fair trial. Courts need to ensure that electronic service does not
put at a disadvantage those who do not have technological resources. In addition, data privacy and security are
paramount issues. The use of electronic service increases the likelihood of
data breaches, unauthorized access, and fraudulent messages. Legal authorities
and courts must implement protective measures to secure sensitive legal
documents against cyber threats.
Moreover, judicial discretion significantly influences the acceptance of
electronic service, potentially leading to inconsistencies in its application.
While some courts have adapted to digital service, others remain hesitant,
causing discrepancies in enforcement. There is a need for standardized
guidelines and clear legislation to ensure consistent application across
different jurisdictions. Addressing these challenges is crucial to fully harness
the benefits of electronic service of summons while safeguarding procedural
fairness and the rights to due process.
Comparative Analysis: India vs. United States, United Kingdom, and Singapore The adoption of
virtual hearings and electronic service of summons varies greatly between
jurisdictions, reflecting differences in technological infrastructure, legal
systems, and socio-economic conditions. India has gradually embraced virtual
hearings, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the Supreme Court
issuing suo motu guidelines in In Re: Guidelines for Court Functioning Through
Video Conferencing During COVID-19.[34]
High Courts were granted the freedom to create procedural rules, enabling
flexibility in digital operations. Moreover, the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908,
which previously mandated physical delivery of summons, now allows for
electronic service via email, WhatsApp, and SMS, provided proof of delivery is
established.[35]
Nevertheless, India faces significant obstacles such as inadequate digital
infrastructure, low internet access in rural areas, cybersecurity threats, and
digital illiteracy, which hinder the widespread implementation of virtual
hearings and electronic summons. The United States is at the forefront of
judicial digitalization, providing strong frameworks for virtual hearings and
electronic summons. Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP), courts
permit electronic submission of legal documents, and platforms like PACER
(Public Access to Court Electronic Records) facilitate online access to case
files, enhancing transparency and efficiency. Rule 4(f)(3) of the FRCP allows
electronic service of summons with the recipient’s consent or court approval,
particularly in international cases.[36]
Nonetheless, despite these advancements, the U.S. encounters challenges such as
digital exclusion for marginalized communities, the necessity of protecting
constitutional due process, and cybersecurity issues, which threaten sensitive
judicial data. The United Kingdom takes a balanced stance by permitting virtual
hearings and electronic service of summons under stringent legal protections.
The Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), especially
Part 6, govern document service and require either mutual consent or court
approval for electronic service, ensuring fair procedures. The CE-File (Courts
Electronic Filing) system optimizes case filings and decreases dependence on
physical documentation. [37]However,
the U.K. still contends with challenges like slow adaptation from legal
professionals, the need for explicit consent, and the security of digital
files, which hinder a swift transition to digital operations.
Conversely, Singapore is recognized
as a global leader in judicial digitalization, featuring its advanced
Integrated Case Management System (ICMS) and Electronic Filing System (EFS).
Virtual hearings are commonly held using secure video conferencing platforms,
and electronic service of summons is allowed through official court portals,
email, and verified digital platforms.[38]
This smooth integration of technology has greatly diminished physical paperwork
and improved procedural efficiency. However, Singapore also faces challenges
such as cybersecurity threats and limited access for certain groups of society
who are unfamiliar with technology. A comparative evaluation reveals distinct
differences in approach. India faces infrastructural difficulties and digital
illiteracy despite progressive legal reforms. The U.S. excels in technological
adoption but confronts issues regarding digital exclusion and data security.
The U.K. emphasizes procedural fairness through mandatory court approval for
electronic service yet lags in rapid adaptability. In contrast, Singapore has
set a standard with its fully integrated digital judicial system, promoting
efficiency and reducing dependence on physical processes. While all
jurisdictions strive to strike a balance between technological efficiency and
legal protections, Singapore's method is particularly notable for its seamless
digitalization, whereas India continues to struggle with foundational
infrastructure and accessibility issues.
Critical Analysis
The introduction of virtual hearings
and electronic summons has greatly improved the efficiency, accessibility, and
cost-effectiveness of the judicial system by removing the necessity for
in-person court appearances and paperwork, leading to quicker resolutions of
cases, better management of dockets, and the capacity to handle larger case
loads in shorter timeframes. This shift to digital has broadened access to
justice, especially benefiting individuals living in rural locations and those
with disabilities, while also cutting down on travel, accommodation, and
paperwork expenses for both litigants and courts, thus encouraging cost savings
and environmental sustainability. Nevertheless, despite these benefits, various
challenges remain, including the digital divide, where inadequate internet
access and low levels of digital literacy adversely impact rural and low-income
communities, hindering fair access to justice. In addition, older litigants and
legal professionals may struggle to use virtual platforms, highlighting the
necessity for extensive training and infrastructure improvements. There are
also valid concerns regarding the preservation of judicial decorum in virtual
environments, where the seriousness of traditional courtrooms may be
diminished, as well as difficulties in assessing witness credibility due to
limited ability to observe non-verbal cues, which adds complexity to virtual
hearings. Furthermore, cybersecurity risks, such as hacking, data breaches, and
unauthorized recordings, pose threats to the confidentiality of cases,
necessitating strong encryption, multi-factor authentication, and compliance
with data protection regulations like India's Information Technology Act, 2000.[39]
Additionally, ensuring that electronic summons are legally enforceable is a
significant challenge, as recipients may contest the validity of digital
service methods, stressing the importance of standardized verification
approaches like digital signatures and read confirmations, along with
legislative amendments to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908[40],
to maintain procedural fairness and deter evasion of service. It is essential
to tackle these challenges to fully leverage the benefits of virtual hearings
and electronic summons while ensuring equal access, procedural integrity, and
judicial efficiency.
Recommendations
To successfully incorporate virtual
hearings and electronic summons in India, it is vital to tackle current
challenges and boost judicial efficiency. Enhancing digital infrastructure in
rural regions and offering affordable internet access and devices will help
close the digital gap and improve justice accessibility. Initiating digital
literacy programs for legal experts and judicial officials will facilitate a
smooth integration of technology. Ensuring cybersecurity is critical to
safeguard court procedures, necessitating the use of advanced encryption,
multi-factor authentication, and stringent access controls. Routine security
assessments and educating users about safe online behaviors will help reduce
cyber risks. To achieve legal clarity, the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [41]should be
amended to officially acknowledge virtual hearings and electronic summons.
Standardizing acknowledgment processes, such as read receipts, digital
signatures, and tracking systems, will help avoid service conflicts. Imposing
strict penalties for misuse or avoidance will maintain judicial integrity. A
hybrid approach should be implemented: virtual hearings for procedural issues
and in-person sessions for witness testimonies and critical evidence
assessment, ensuring fairness and reliability. Finally, ongoing evaluation is
crucial. A national monitoring authority should review the implementation of
virtual courts, collect feedback, and promote technological enhancements. These
measures will assist India in creating a secure, inclusive, and efficient digital
judiciary, ensuring that technology bolsters rather than obstructs access to
justice.
Conclusion: The
Indian judiciary’s adoption of virtual hearings and the use of electronic
summons, as outlined in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908[42],
marks a significant step forward in updating the judicial system. The COVID-19
pandemic accelerated this shift, making legal processes more efficient and
accessible. Nevertheless, this transformation has also sparked concerns
regarding fairness in procedures, data protection, and digital access,
particularly for underrepresented communities.
Although the judiciary has made
considerable strides in adopting technology, the lack of a definitive statutory
framework within the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, has resulted in unclear
procedures. To tackle these issues, legislative updates should aim to create
clear regulations for virtual hearings, protect data privacy, and guarantee
equal access to justice. It is imperative to enhance digital infrastructure
across all courts to avoid technological inequalities and maintain fairness in
procedures.
As we look ahead, adopting a balanced
approach that merges technological progress with procedural protections will be
vital for maintaining public trust in virtual judicial processes. Ongoing
judicial interaction, policy formulation, and empirical analysis will be
essential in enhancing the delivery of digital justice. By addressing current
shortcomings and ensuring inclusivity, the Indian judiciary can effectively
move towards a more efficient and accessible legal system while upholding the
core principles of justice.
[1] Code of Civil Procedure, 1908,
Order V Rule 10A (India).
[2] Supreme Court of India (2020). In
Re: Guidelines for Court Functioning Through Video Conferencing
[3] Sharma, P. (2020). E-Summons
and the Future of Legal Notices. Indian Law Review.
[4] Desai, M. (2022). Cybersecurity
Risks in Virtual Courtrooms. Technology & Law Review.
[5] Supreme Court of India (2020). Guidelines
on Virtual Court Functioning.
[6] Ministry of Law and Justice,
Government of India (2020). Report on Virtual Courts and E-Courts.
[7] Code of Civil Procedure, 1908,
Order V Rule 10A (India)
[8] Patel, R. (2021). Virtual
Courts: A Step Towards Digital Justice. Indian Legal Journal.
[9] Supreme Court of India (2020). In
Re: Guidelines for Court Functioning Through Video Conferencing.
[10] Sharma, P. (2020). E-Summons
and the Future of Legal Notices. Indian Law Review.
[11] Supreme Court of India (2020). Guidelines
on Virtual Court Functioning
[12] Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme
Court of India, (2018) 13 SCC 574
[13] Supreme Court of India (2020). In
Re: Guidelines for Court Functioning Through Video Conferencing
[14] Iyer, N. (2021). Digital
Justice: Bridging the Gap in Indian Courts. Legal Perspectives Journal
[15] Sharma, P. (2020). E-Summons and the Future of
Legal Notices. Indian Law Review.
[16] Desai, M. (2022). Cybersecurity Risks in Virtual
Courtrooms. Technology & Law Review.
[17] Singh, A. (2015). Technology and Judicial
Efficiency in India. Journal of Law & Policy.
[18] Kumar, R. (2021). COVID-19 and the Indian
Judiciary: Adaptation to Virtual Hearings. Indian Law Review.
[19] Sharma, P. (2020). Digital Transformation in
Judicial Procedures: An Analysis of CPC and IT Act. National Law Journal.
[20] Gupta, S. (2019). Open
Justice and Virtual Courts: The Supreme Court’s Evolving Stance. Supreme
Court Review
[21] Reddy, V. (2022). Natural Justice in the Age of
Digital Courts. Journal of Legal Studies.
[22] Iyer, N. (2021). Bridging the Digital Divide: Access
to Justice in Virtual Courts. Legal Perspectives Journal.
[23] Desai, M. (2022). Cybersecurity Risks in Virtual
Courtrooms. Technology & Law Review.
[24] Patel, J. (2020). Efficiency vs. Fairness in
Virtual Hearings: A Judicial Dilemma. Journal of Procedural Law.
[25] The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, No. 5, Acts of
Parliament, 1908 (India).
[26] General Clauses Act, 1897, No. 10, Acts of
Parliament, 1897 (India).
[27] Information Technology Act, 2000, No. 21, Acts of
Parliament, 2000 (India).
[28] Indian Evidence Act, 1872, No. 1, Acts of Parliament,
1872 (India).
[29] KSL & Indus. Ltd. v. Mannalal Khandelwal, (2005)
13 SCC 24 (India).
[30] Tata Sons Ltd. v. John Doe, (2013) SCC OnLine Del 482
(India).
[31] Cent. Elec. Regulatory Comm’n v. Nat’l Hydroelectric
Power Corp., (2010) 10 SCC 280 (India).
[32] SBI Cards & Payment Servs. Pvt. Ltd. v. Rohidas
Jadhav, (2021) SCC OnLine SC 456 (India).
[33] Indian Bank v. Satyam Fibres (India) Pvt. Ltd.,
(2022) SCC OnLine SC 987 (India).
[34] Suo Motu Writ (Civil) No. 5/2020 (India).
[35] Code of Civil Procedure, No. 5 of 1908, INDIA CODE
(1908).
[36] Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(3)
[37] Civil Procedure Rules, 1998, Part 6 (Eng.)
[38]Supreme Court of Singapore, Integrated Case Management
System (ICMS).
[39] Information Technology Act, No. 21 of 2000, INDIA
CODE (2000).
[40] Code of Civil Procedure, No. 5 of 1908, § 27, INDIA
CODE (1908).
[41] Id. at § 27A.
[42] Id. at § 27B.
Article Information
INDIAN JUDICIARY’S STANCE ON VIRTUAL HEARINGS AND SERVICE OF SUMMONS VIA ELECTRONIC MEANS UNDER THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908
Authors: GAUREEKA NATH
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2025/03/15
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.