SUKHPAL Vs. RAKESH KUMAR

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:-

(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.