JASBIR SINGH, J. - (1.) This revision petition has been filed against order, vide which, evidence of the petitioner-plaintiff was closed by order. Counsel states that due to some gap of communication with her counsel, the petitioner failed to bring evidence in Court on the date fixed. It has further been stated that suit of the petitioner is for declaration, involving valuable right in property and if the petitioner is not allowed to conclude her evidence, she shall suffer an irreparable loss. A prayer has been made that, may be, subject to payment of costs, only one opportunity be granted to the petitioner to complete her evidence at her own risk and responsibility.
(2.) This Court feels that rules and procedure are handmaid of justice to enhance the same and not to subvert it. Their Lordships of Supreme Court in Sardar Amarjit Singh Kalra (dead) by L.Rs. and others v. Parmod Gupta (Smt.) dead) by L.Rs. And others (2003) 3 S.C.C. 272, in para 26 of the judgment had opined as under:- "Laws of procedure are meant to regulate effectively, assist and aid the object of doing substantial and real justice and not to foreclose even an adjudication merits of substantial rights of citizen under personal, property and other laws. Procedure has always been viewed as the handmaid of justice and not meant to hamper the cause of justice or sanctify miscarriage of justice."
(3.) View extracted above, was reiterated by their Lordships of Supreme Court in N.Balajit v. Virendra Singh and others, (2004) 8 Supreme Court Cases 312, wherein after noting ratio of the judgment, referred to above, in para 10 of the judgment, it was observed that the procedure would not be used to discourage the substantial and effective justice but would be so construed as to advance the cause of justice.;