JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Vide order under challenge, evidence of the petitioner
claimant was closed by the Tribunal below. Counsel states that on
the
date fixed, petitioner could not produce the necessary evidence in
Court
as mother of the counsel had died. Shri Ankit Gupta, Advocate, had
appeared only as a proxy counsel. He further states that by not
bringing
evidence, petitioner, who is a claimant, was not to gain anything,
rather
he was bound to suffer. He prayed that in the interest of justice, one
opportunity be granted to the petitioner to complete his evidence, at
his
own risk and responsibility.
(2.) Rules and procedure are handmaid of justice. These are
meant to enhance its cause and not to scuttle the same. Their
Lordships
of the 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
the Supreme Court in N. Balajit v. Virender 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.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.