JASBIR SINGH, J. - (1.)Vide order, under challenge, evidence of the petitioner was closed by order. Counsel states that due to some gap of communication with his counsel on the date fixed, petitioner could not bring evidence before the Court below. It has further been stated that suit against the petitioner is for recovery and if he is not allowed to conclude his evidence, he will suffer an irreparable loss. It has been stated that now the matter is fixed for 9.2.2006 and petitioner shall conclude his evidence on the said date before the trial Court, may be subject to payment of costs. Rules and procedure are handmaid of justice to enhance the same and not to subvert it.
(2.)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.