20 July

Sticky

Double Standards in justice:Ambani vs MSMEs

Mathews J. Nedumpara 98205 35428 17.07.2025. *Press Release* (Double Standards in justice:Ambani vs MSMEs) In my experience of over four decades as a lawyer—and even earlier, as a litigant—I can say without hesitation that in our country, the common man does not get justice. The elite and the super-rich can buy justice. Some may accuse me of contempt of court for saying so openly, but that is the unfortunate truth. I say this not to scandalize the institution, but because I believe that much-needed reforms in the judiciary are impossible unless the common man is made aware of the deep deficiencies in our justice delivery...

20 July

0 Comments

Sticky

Rule of law must prevail:Nedumpara’s Third petition in SC seeks FIR against Justice Varma (Part 1)

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Blogs/Articles

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION) WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2025 (UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) IN THE MATTER OF: MATHEWS J. NEDUMPARA & ORS. PETITIONERS VERSUS THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS WITH I.A. NO. OF 2025 APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND ARGUE IN THE ABOVE-MENTIONED WRIT PETITION FILED BEFORE THIS HON’BLE COURT AS PARTY IN PERSONS PAPER BOOK (KINDLY SEE INDEX INSIDE) MATHEWS J. NEDUMPARA & 3 ORS.: PARTY-IN-PERSONS MOB. NO. +91 9820535428 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS S.NO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PAGE NO. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. INDEX S. No. Particulars of Documents Page No. of part to which it belongs Remarks Part I [Contents of Paper Book] Part-II [Contents of file alone. [i] [ii] [iii]...

14 July

0 Comments

Sticky

“Good men must not obey the law too well” – video recording of court proceedings and its circulation

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Blogs/Articles

Mathews J. Nedumpara 98205 35428 17.03.2025. The Kerala High Court took objection to our recording of the proceedings and sharing of the same. Though not done by me personally, I have no hesitation to take responsibility. Several MSMEs perturbed by the unfortunate fact that the Courts have been denying them the benefit of the notification which has received the assent of both houses of the Parliament which prohibits recovery action except with the permission of the committee, record the VC proceedings, at the various forums, High Court, Supreme Court etc. 2. Quite recently I defended the cause of an MSME before the Kerala High...

14 July

0 Comments

Sticky

To declare that the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 is unconstitutional and void, or at least Sections 2(c)(i), 14, 16 and 17(5) thereof

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Petitions

It is a fundamental principle of jurisprudence that to institute a legal proceeding seeking a declaratory remedy or for enforcement of the same, no cause of action needs to exist. The Petitioner, who is a lawyer enrolled with the Bar Council of Kerala in 1984 and practicing since then, is leading a National Campaign which has as its prime objectives the following:- Advertisement of vacancies of Judges of the higher judiciary, invitation of applications and references , open and transparent selection and appointment, instead of the current system of appointment by invitation where only the elite and super elite...

14 July

0 Comments

Sticky

Protection from defamation in a judicial proceedings – Concerted act on the part of Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. Jamdar to malign and defame me, a lawyer – Complaint reg.

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Open Letters

My tryst with the justice delivery system began at a young age in 1979 as a litigant in the Munsiff Court, Pala. I conducted the case mostly as a party in person up to the Supreme Court. The case shaped my destiny, but for it, I would not have taken up law as a profession. I started my practice in the year 1984 and continued in my native state Kerala. However, certain vicissitudes of life made me shift my practice to Delhi and eventually to the Foreign Exchange and other tribunals in Delhi. There I could come across corruption without even...

14 July

0 Comments

Sticky

Where a statute provides for an appeal against an interim order, is it open to a litigant to choose at his sweet will, a variation at the hands of the court of first instance or to opt for an appeal? Does the doctrine of res judicata have any application

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Blogs/Articles

(Excerts from an affidavit drafted by Sri. Nedumpara) 1. This Court by its order dated 21.12.2021 was pleased to protect me from dispossession, but subject to the condition that I pay an amount of Rs. 25 lakhs. Had this Court had the benefit of hearing my lawyer, I bonafide believe, that this Court would have protected me without conditions. I sought my counsel’s advice. He told me that I can seek correction of the order before this Court (single bench) itself, or prefer an appeal under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act, which provides for an appeal even against...

14 July

0 Comments

Sticky

Judicial Reforms: Is the hope in Chief Justice Chandrachud waning?

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Blogs/Articles

Mathews J Nedumpara 26.01.2024. 98205 35428 Judicial Reforms: Is the hope in Chief Justice Chandrachud waning? While some say that their hope in Justice DY Chandrachud, in bringing about judicial Reforms has been waning, I still remain hopeful. There are areas where I differ in opinion from Justice Chandrachud, but when compared to those areas where we are on the same page, the former pales. Many of my fellow lawyers, particularly those who hail from rural areas and who belong to SC/ST and have had their early education in the vernacular language, had expected sweeping changes during Justice Chandrachud’s tenure as Cheif Justice. 14...

14 July

0 Comments

Sticky

Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. V. Gangapurwala The Chief Justice of the High Court of Judicature at Madras

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Petitions

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA INHERENT JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2024 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 880 OF 2017 (Against the final impugned judgment dated 15.02.2024 passed by this Hon’ble Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 880 of 2017 along with Writ petitions (Civil) no. 59 of 2018, 975 of 2022 & 1132 of 2022) IN THE MATTER OF: Mathews J. Nedumpara & anr. … Review Petitioners v. Association for Democratic Reforms and ors. … Respondent/Original Petitioners WITH I.A. NO. OF 2024 APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND I.A. NO. OF 2024 APPLICATION FOR HEARING OF REVIEW PETITION IN OPEN COURT PAPER BOOK (FOR...

14 July

0 Comments

Sticky

Wholly avoidable hurdles created by the department of the registry of the High Court dealing with the writ jurisdiction (civil) – Request for intervention.

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Blogs/Articles

Mathews J Nedumpara President National Lawyers Campaign For Judicial Transparency and Reforms, NLC 98205 35428 09.02.2024 To, Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. V. Gangapurwala The Chief Justice of the High Court of Judicature at Madras May it please your Lordship, Sub: Wholly avoidable hurdles created by the department of the registry of the High Court dealing with the writ jurisdiction (civil) – Request for intervention. 1. The Madras High Court being one of the oldest chartered high courts of this country, has all throughout been a role model to all high courts and has produced a galaxy of eminent lawyers and judges. Any outstation lawyer who visits the Madras High Court...

14 July

0 Comments

Sticky

The Supreme Court ought to hear SLPs concerning the very lives, liberties and properties of the citizens of this country and adjudicate real lis, rather than spending all its time on matters falling in the exclusive province of the legislature and executive, such as demonitisation, NJAC, CEC, Article 370, etc. – A critical analysis of the functioning of the Supreme Court of India.

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Blogs/Articles

Mathews J. Nedumpara 6.9.2023 1. In the Supreme Court of India, on an average 60,000 Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) are filed under Article 136 of the Constitution. Any person aggrieved by any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order of any court or tribunal, can seek the leave to appeal. For instance, a person aggrieved by an order of a Magistrate seeking to dispossess him of his home, where he has not been heard, can straight away invoke Article 136. 2. Today, almost 90% of cases instituted in the Supreme Court are SLPs. Writ petitions under Article 32, Public Interest Litigation (PIL) etc. constitute...

Disclaimer: