STATE OF HARYANA Vs. KARAMJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE order, under challenge, defence of the petitioners was struck off for want of filing of written statement. Counsel states that due to some official's lapse. written statement was not prepared in time. It has further been stated that now the written statement is ready and the petitioners need only one opportunity to file the same in Court. 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 LRs. and others v. Parmod Gupta (Smt.) dead) by LRs. and others, (2003)3 SCC 272, in para 26 of the judgment had opined as under :

(3.) FURTHERMORE , in Kailash v. Nanhku and ors., 2005(2) RCR (Civil) 379 and Smt. Rani Kusum v. Smt. Kanchan Devi and ors., 2005(3) RCR (Civil) 727, it has been held by their Lordships of Supreme Court that provisions of Order VIll Rule 1 of CPC are directory and not mandatory in nature.