The practice diary

The two questions you answer before you open anything else

What is listed tomorrow, and what is running out of time. Every drafting tool in this category stops at the document. Legosphere Legal keeps the diary the drafting stops mattering without.

Book a walkthrough See the workspace

Why a drafting product has a diary in it

A diary is a morning habit; a draft is an afternoon task. An advocate checks the board and the dates before deciding what today is even about — and then, separately, opens whatever tool drafts the petition. Two applications, and the one that knows the deadline is not the one that writes the document.

That split is the reason this exists. When the matter, the hearing date, the limitation working and the draft are the same record, the software can tell you that the appeal you are drafting is out of time before you finish drafting it. When they are in different products, nothing can tell you that.

It is also the one part of this software with a hard-stakes failure mode that has nothing to do with AI. A missed limitation period is professional negligence. That is why the engine is built to show its working rather than to assert a date.

Limitation

What "showing the working" means

This is the shape of what the product displays. Not a date with a tick beside it — the reasoning, and then what the reasoning could not see.

Limitation · the working

First appeal · decree of the trial court

Article 96, Schedule to the Limitation Act 1963
Appeal from a decree — ninety days.
90 days
Date of the decree
The trigger from which the period is counted.
11 March
Section 12(1)
The day from which time runs is excluded.
count from 12 March
Section 12(2)
Time requisite for obtaining a certified copy of the decree, as recorded on the copy itself.
+ 18 days
Section 4 · court closure
The computed date falls inside the summer vacation of the court this matter is in.
advanced to reopening

Computed due date

2 July

Unverified — awaiting advocate confirmation

What the limitation engine will not do

It will not tell you a date is safe. It cannot, and software that says otherwise is selling you something it does not have.

It cannot see how long a certified copy actually took, only what someone recorded.
It cannot see a court holiday that is not in a loaded calendar — and a court with no calendar on file is shown as an honest gap, never assumed clean.
It cannot see an acknowledgement of liability under section 18 that restarts the period.
It cannot see an amendment, a condonation application, or anything else pending that moves the date.

So every date is stored with its working and its caveats, and stays unverified until an advocate confirms it. No screen shows a due date without showing what it did not account for. A green tick against a date this engine computed on its own would be the single worst thing this product could ship.

What it carries

Five things, each with a rule that constrains it

The diary is small on purpose. Every capability here has a failure mode that costs an advocate something real, so each one is built to be checkable rather than confident.

Hearings and tasks

The matters, the dates, and what has to be ready before each one.

Every hearing sits on its matter, so the file, the drafts and the date are one record rather than three.
Tasks carry the hearing they are for — "affidavit to be filed before the 14th" is a task with a deadline the system can see.
The day view answers the only question that matters at 8am: what is listed, where, and what is not ready.

Limitation, with the working shown

The Limitation Act 1963, computed step by step and displayed as the reasoning rather than a number.

The applicable Article from the Schedule, named — not inferred silently.
Section 12(1): the day from which time runs is excluded.
Section 12(2), for appeals and revisions: the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree or order is excluded.
Section 4: where the computed date falls inside a court closure, it advances to the day the court reopens — through adjacent closures, with each shift recorded separately.
Every entry stays unverified until an advocate confirms it. The software never marks a date safe.

The day’s cause list

A board is thousands of cases and a handful are yours. Matching is exact or normalised — never fuzzy.

An Indian case number is written a dozen ways: W.P.(C) 1234/2023 · WP(C)/1234/2023 · Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1234 of 2023. All of them normalise to the same key.
The matcher reports how it matched — exact or normalised — so you can see what it did rather than trust that it did something.
No edit distance. No party-name similarity. A wrong match puts somebody else’s hearing in your diary, which is worse than an unmatched line.
An unmatched item is the ordinary case, not a defect. The board is not yours; most of it never will be.

Time capture

Log time against a matter and the applicable rate is resolved and frozen onto the entry then and there.

Rate resolution follows the obvious precedence: a matter-specific rate beats a client-specific one, and the latest rate effective on or before the date of the work wins.
The resolved rate is stored on the time entry itself, not recomputed at invoice time.
A rate card added or changed next quarter cannot silently reprice work already logged — let alone work already invoiced.

Client invoicing

Bills that reconcile to the rupee, in a system deliberately separate from what you pay us.

Money is exact decimal throughout, rounded half-up the way a person totalling a bill by hand rounds it — never floating point, never the language’s banker’s-rounding default.
Invoice numbers sequence per advocate per calendar year and are never reused, including for voided invoices. An issued number is a fact.
Tax is an input you supply, applied as plain arithmetic. Whether GST applies to your services, and who bears it under reverse charge, depends on your registration and your client’s — the invoice says that is your determination, and never prints a rate as though the software worked it out.
Legosphere billing and client billing never touch each other. One is what you pay us; the other is your practice’s money.

Honesty about calendars

A court calendar is either loaded or it is not

Only fixed-date national holidays are seeded automatically, because only they can be stated without asserting something uncertain. A court’s vacation dates and moveable-festival holidays are entered as data, never invented. So "section 4 applied" means this court has a calendar on file that was actually checked — not that the computed date happened to look fine.

Why this is rare

Why the drafting tools do not have this

Because it is not a drafting feature, and it does not demo well. A citation that resolves is impressive in thirty seconds; a limitation date that arrives with four caveats attached is not. But the caveats are the product. An advocate does not need software that is confident about a deadline — they need software that shows what it checked, and admits what it could not.

Bring next week's board and one appeal you are worried about

We will match the cause list against your matters in front of you, and compute the limitation date with the working visible. If the working is wrong, you will see exactly where.

Book a walkthrough Read the manifesto

Get in touch

Got questions?
We answer them ourselves.

No chatbot, no ticket queue. Tell us what you are trying to do and someone who has worked on the software will reply.

info@legosphere.com