The judge ruled on the case on Tuesday after legal practitioners from Kathmandu held a video argument.
We use Google Cloud Translation Services. Google requires we provide the following disclaimer relating to use of this service:
This service may contain translations powered by Google. Google disclaims all warranties related to the translations, expressed or implied, including any warranties of accuracy, reliability, and any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, and noninfringement.
The Tulsipur Butwal Bench of the High Court has started hearings in the bench through audio-visual. Such a practice has been done in the Butwal Bench.
The Butwal Bench of the High Court on Tuesday debated and ordered five cases including double registration of rights. Senior Advocate Tirtharaj Basaula and Advocate Barsha Bhattarai argued in the joint bench of Butwal Chief Justice Vasudev Acharya and Tej Narayan Poudel of the High Court through 'video conferencing'. The court administration has stated that both of them participated in the debate from Kathmandu district.
Advocate Barsha Bhattarai, who participated in the debate from Kathmandu, said that the Tulsipur Butwal Bench of the High Court had issued a notice regarding 'video conferencing' on Chaitra 10 and that they had applied for it on Monday and participated in Tuesday's debate from Kathmandu.
‘This can be considered a technological leap in the history of the judiciary,’ she said, ‘Video conferencing technology will be very useful and accessible not only in litigation but also in oral arguments, closed arguments, etc.’ She said that this will also be fruitful for the opposition or witnesses abroad. ‘This is a very good start,’ she added.
According to Thirendra Kumar Subedi, Information Officer of the Butwal High Court, after the litigation through ‘video conferencing’, the Nawalparasi District Court has upheld the decision of 2082 Jestha 12 in the case related to the retention of rights between the plaintiff Nawalparasi’s Bhrikuti Multipurpose Cooperative Society and the defendants Prem Chandra Teli and Mantir Prasad Teli. It was the first time that the High Court had decided a case through audio-visual means.
‘This has made it easier and more convenient for service recipients, parties to the case, legal practitioners and others in the advocacy of cases,’ he said, ‘and it will also help in the regular hearing of cases.’ He said that although earlier, due to the lack of such facilities, legal practitioners were forced to postpone the presentation of cases due to lack of time, now such a situation will be minimized. The High Court has stated that ‘video conferencing’ will continue in the advocacy of cases.
