https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436731 Mandatory e-filing before the Debt Recovery Tribunals and Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunals was upheld as a valid digital filing regime, because its adoption was gradual, preceded by training and consultation, and supported transparency, efficiency and continuous access to justice. The challenge seeking to undo compulsory e-filing was rejected. At the same time, the Court recognised practical barriers arising from the digital divide and held that access concerns should be met through institutional support, including help desks, e-sewa kendras, monitoring, reporting and grievance redressal mechanisms. It declined to create a blanket exception for specified classes of litigants, including female practitioners and litigants, preferring targeted facilitative measures instead. en-us Wed, 29 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Apr 2023 08:45:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436731 Mandatory e-filing before the Debt Recovery Tribunals and Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunals was upheld as a valid digital filing regime, because its adoption was gradual, preceded by training and consultation, and supported transparency, efficiency and continuous access to justice. The challenge seeking to undo compulsory e-filing was rejected. At the same time, the Court recognised practical barriers arising from the digital divide and held that access concerns should be met through institutional support, including help desks, e-sewa kendras, monitoring, reporting and grievance redressal mechanisms. It declined to create a blanket exception for specified classes of litigants, including female practitioners and litigants, preferring targeted facilitative measures instead. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 29 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436731