ARTI Vs. SUNIL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide order, dated 1.2.2006, evidence of the petitioners/ claimants, was closed by order. Counsel states that by not bringing evidence in Court, the petitioners were not to gain anything, as their application, to claim compensation is pending before the Court below. It has been stated that due to gap of communication and financial constraints, evidence could not be brought in Court on the date fixed. An undertaking has been given that the petitioners need only one opportunity to complete their evidence at their own risk and responsibility. It has been prayed that may be subject to payment of costs, one opportunity be granted to them. This Court feels that the petitioners are the claimants and if they are not allowed to complete their evidence, their application to claim compensation is likely to be dismissed. 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:-

(3.) In view of ratio of judgments, referred to above and facts of this case, revision petition is allowed, order under challenge, is set aside and the trial Court is directed to give one more opportunity to the petitioners to complete their evidence at their own risk and responsibility.