MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, LUDHIANA Vs. BIMLA KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT is an admitted fact that appeal filed by the petitioner, was dismissed being barred by four days of limitation. Counsel for the petitioner states that the order, passed by the appellate Court below, in view of facts and circumstances of the case, was not justified.

(2.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court feels that the appellate Court below has taken a very strict view on merits in the present case. Delay was not very huge which could not have been condoned in the interest of justice, especially when the petitioner is a corporate legal body and for any fault committed by its officers, it was not supposed to suffer. It is further revealed from the record that there was sufficient reason, on the basis of which delay was required to be condoned. Otherwise also, it is desirable, except in cases where delay is huge/mala fide, the Courts shall decide the matters on merits. Rules and procedure are handmaid of justice. These are meant to enhance the same and not to subvert it.

(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.