“Justice Should Not Be Non-Suited On Technicalities”: Punjab and Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Closing Defendant’s Evidence
– In a significant ruling today, the Punjab and Haryana High Court emphasized that “matters should be decided on their merits” and that “parties should not be non-suited on technicalities.” The judgment came from Justice Vikram Aggarwal in the case of Hardial Singh versus Niranjan Singh and Another (CR-5503 of 2023).
The petitioner, Hardial Singh, had filed a revision petition against the order dated 4th September 2023 by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate of Baba Bakala Sahib. The said order closed the evidence of the petitioner-defendant No.1, who had missed multiple opportunities to present his case. Hardial Singh argued that his absence from court was due to genuine health conditions, as evidenced by his medical card.
While acknowledging that the petitioner had been given 10 effective opportunities to lead his evidence and had only availed three, Justice Vikram Aggarwal opined, “It has to be borne in mind that matters should be decided on merits and parties should not be non-suited on technicalities.”
Setting aside the trial court’s decision, the High Court granted one last opportunity to the petitioner to lead his evidence. This reprieve is conditional, however, requiring Hardial Singh to pay ₹5,000 in costs to the plaintiff.
The ruling has garnered attention as it reflects the court’s willingness to allow parties to present their case fully, even when previous opportunities have been missed. This is especially significant in the backdrop of a broader judicial conversation around the importance of deciding cases on their actual merits rather than on procedural technicalities.
Mr. Sarabjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner, expressed satisfaction at the court’s decision, stating that “this ruling underscores the importance of justice over procedural hiccups.”
Decided on: 19.09.2023
Hardial Singh vs Niranjan Singh and Another
