Examine how ad-hoc judicial practices, in the absence of codified law, contribute to case pendency in India. Suggest reforms.

Ad-hoc judicial practice refers to courts settling recurring procedural questions case-by-case because no codified rule governs them. With pendency running into crores of cases tracked on the National Judicial Data Grid [3], such uncodified discretion does not merely look untidy — it manufactures fresh litigation.

How ad-hoc practice feeds pendency

• Satellite litigation: where no rule exists, parties must litigate the rule itself. In National Seeds Corporation v. National Agro Seed Corporation (2026 INSC 1017), the Supreme Court found no statutory prescription on how money deposited to secure a stay is held, invested or adjusted, producing inconsistent orders and recurring disputes over interest [1]. One dispute becomes two.
• Precedent instability: each bench fixes its own standard, making appeals worthwhile and swelling the appellate docket.
• Unequal treatment: similarly placed litigants are treated differently by forum — an Article 14 concern that itself invites challenge.
• Administrative fragmentation: tribunals such as NCLT, NCLAT and DRTs frame their own conditions, so no forum's practice binds the rest.
• Economic cost: large sums stay locked in bank instruments at rates no rule fixes, eroding litigants' real returns [1].

Reforms

• Codify custody, not quantum: a statute should standardise the bank, instrument, interest accounting and withdrawal of deposits, while leaving the amount to judicial discretion, which protects weaker litigants.
• Use existing rule-making power: Article 145 (Supreme Court) and Article 227 (High Courts) allow immediate procedural rules without awaiting Parliament.
• Follow through on reference: the Court has asked the Law Commission of India, with the RBI and Ministries of Finance and Law, to study models like the US Court Registry Investment System [1]; since Commission reports are only recommendatory [2], Government action must follow.
• Adapt a proven domestic model: RBI's DEA Fund Scheme, 2014 pools untouched deposits centrally while keeping every claim traceable and refundable with interest [4].
• Monitor compliance through NJDG dashboards [3].

Pendency is as much a product of procedural silence as of judicial shortage. Codifying routine practice, backed by the judiciary's own rule-making powers, converts avoidable satellite disputes into settled administration — advancing the equality and speedy-justice promise of Articles 14 and 21.