Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Procedural Lapses Cannot Defeat Substantial Justice: High Court Upholds TDSAT's Decision Allowing Additional Evidence Post Evidence Phase

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subramonium Prasad, has upheld the decision of the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) to permit the inclusion of additional documents after the closure of the evidence phase in a dispute involving M/S Deora Cable Networks and DEN Network Ltd.

The High Court's decision came in the wake of a writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the TDSAT's order dated 13th September 2023. The dispute revolved around the recovery of dues and the return of 778 Set Top Boxes, with the TDSAT allowing the Respondent to submit additional documents crucial for the adjudication of the dispute.

In his judgment, Justice Prasad emphasized the importance of substantive justice over procedural technicalities, quoting, "The procedural lapses cannot defeat the substantial justice." He further highlighted that the Tribunal was cognizant of the delay in filing the documents but deemed it necessary to ensure a comprehensive resolution of the dispute.

The High Court noted the Tribunal's approach aligned with the principles of natural justice and the provisions of the TRAI Act, which do not strictly adhere to the Code of Civil Procedure. Justice Prasad elaborated, "The TRAI Act's emphasis is on observing principles of natural justice over strict procedural compliance."

Reaffirming the limited scope of the High Court under Article 227, the judgment stated that such powers should be exercised sparingly and not as an appellate mechanism. The High Court found no "patent error or perversity" in the Tribunal's decision, thereby dismissing the writ petition.

Date of decision: 22 JANUARY, 2024

M/S DEORA CABLE NATWORKS VS DEN NETWORK LTD

 

Latest Legal News