Work on Exit
Papers, books, op-eds, blog posts, datasets and case studies on this project in one place, newest first. Part of Projects; the full lists are on Research and Books.
-
2023
Abstract
Information systems about dispute resolution processes and forums that can aid litigants, a key stakeholder in the justice delivery system, are absent. We propose the development of a system that allows a litigant to comparatively evaluate the different forums where he can take his dispute for resolution. To develop this system, we first identify the types of information that can support the decision of a potential litigant on whether to take her matter to court and if yes, which court. We find that information on efficiency, effectiveness, fairness, predictability, and access to courts are crucial for a litigant's decision-making process. Subsequently, we locate data sources required to quantify such measures from the viewpoint of periodically publishing such measures in the public domain. For this purpose, the case type was narrowed down to debt disputes. We systematically collect quantifiable information about cases from the select courts' websites, namely, the Bombay High Court (Bombay HC), the Mumbai bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), and the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT). We use data from these courts up to September 2022. We find that a litigant has the lowest chance of getting a first hearing within the first year of filing a case at the Bombay HC (37%) as compared to the NCLT or the DRT. The chance for disposal within the first year is even slimmer. There is a 1/3rd chance of disposal at the NCLT within one year of filing, while it is less than 1/5th at both the Bombay HC and the DRT. However, a case is likely to have the highest number of hearings at the NCLT. A survey questionnaire is designed and deployed to capture features of a case that cannot be quantified. We deploy the survey to capture the relative performance of each of the three courts to a sample of respondents who have litigated frequently in the courts of our interest. The results of the survey indicate that the NCLT is ranked the highest by survey participants. Bombay HC comes second, and the DRT is ranked third.
-
Abstract
A framework to determine the optimal strength of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) is important, given it's central role as an adjudicator under the Companies Act, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, and the Competition Commission of India. The ability to collect standardised, comprehensive and consistent data from the NCLT, is critical for this. Such data systems support the development of models to estimate the optimal strength of each bench of such a tribunal. In this paper, we explore the use of the weighted caseload method to estimate the capacity requirements of the NCLT, on a recurrent basis given the presence of data.
-
2022
Abstract
The literature on the performance evaluation of the judiciary captures the perspectives of judges, researchers and court administrators. However, it is not obvious if a litigant who proposes to access the judiciary for the resolution of a dispute would use the same or similar metrics when evaluating the performance of courts. In this paper, we review the global literature that evaluates the performance of the judiciary and identify which of the metrics in the literature would directly matter to a litigant who proposes to access the courts for redress. Using the litigant’s expectations as performance metrics, we develop an evaluative framework for comparing similar courts. Our work creates the foundation for developing an information system that could potentially help litigants make informed choices when approaching courts.
-
2020
New thinking on resolution of small firms
- 2019
- 2018
-
2017
Evolution of the insolvency framework for non-financial firms in India
Abstract
The current Indian framework for corporate insolvency resolution, is fraught with deficiencies in the laws, their procedures, their implementation as well as in the capacity of the institutions supporting them. The absence of a coherent and effective mechanism for resolving corporate insolvency has resulted in poor economic outcomes. The origin of the complex framework characterised by multiple, fragmented laws, can be traced back to the history of its evolution. In this paper, we describe the evolution of the corporate insolvency resolution framework, with the objective of linking it back to the policy directive of the time. We conclude that when policy adopts a piecemeal approach focusing on solving only a part of the complex problem, one at a time, it most often leads to inefficient outcomes on the overall objective. We end with a brief description of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016 which is most recent policy initiative in this field. The IBC is a clean, modern law that offers a simple, coherent answer to the insolvency resolution problems under current Indian conditions. Once implemented, the law will potentially change not only the manner in which insolvency is resolved in India but also the entire credit landscape of the country.
- 2016
-
2013
Abstract
This paper proposes and applies a network-based methodology to identify systemically important non-financial firms in India, using balance sheet linkages and equity return correlations to rank firms by their potential for systemic distress propagation.