DEFECTES OF MAYOUR COURT IN

INDIA
Defects in Charter of 1726

After the Charter of 1726 was actually implemented and the

Mayor’s Courts began their functioning, gradually the defects
and lacunae in the provisions of the Charter came into limelight.
It was realized that the Charter was not quite clear in its
language. The working of the Mayors Courts at Bombay,
Calcutta and Madras created many difficulties for native
Indians.
For the first time, the Mayor’s Court administered English law
in India. The English law contained both common law and the
statute law.
Nearly all the common law and statue law as
it existed in England in 1726 was introduced
in the three presidency towns of India.
It completely ignored the Indian customs
and traditions, and was hardly suitable to
Indian conditions in those days.
The Mayor and Aldermen, who presided
over the Mayor’s Court, were either senior
servants of the Company or dependent on
the Company’s pleasure for their stay in
India.
 They had neither any regular legal
training nor any judicial experience to
their credit. Evil consequences were
therefore bound to follow.
 As there was no specific mention about
jurisdiction, the Courts decided that it
was empowered to exercise its
jurisdiction even in such cases where
both parties were native Indians.
 All these created great dissatisfaction and
unrest amongst the native inhabitants of
each presidency town.
 The Charter of 1726 created a Corporation and a
Mayor’s Court in each presidency town. The Mayor’s
Court was constituted to work independently but its
relationship with executive.
 Governor – in – Council was not stated clearly. In
actual practice, the executive machinery expressed its
hatred and jealousy against the independent attitude of
the Mayor’s Court.
 The executive tried to dictate its terms to the judiciary.
But the Mayor and Aldermen came into conflict with
the Governor – in – Council in many cases at Bombay,
Calcutta and Madras.
Instead of the smooth working of these two wings – executive and judiciary – their relations became severely strained in each
presidency town.
The inhabitants of Bombay, Madras and Calcutta were the greatest sufferers due to the constant conflicts between judiciary and the
executive.
It created an atmosphere of great unrest in all the three presidency towns. A petition was sent to the Court of Directors of the
Company, in its reply, made it clear that conflicts should be decided among themselves (natives) according to their own customs.
If they request and choose them to be decided by English laws, then only the matter can be pursued
according to the directions of the Charter of 1726.