Gauhati High Court
M/S Dulen Gas Agency vs Food Corporation Of India on 27 September, 2021
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010074182021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : CRP(IO)/54/2021
M/S DULEN GAS AGENCY
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SHRI MILAN SHANKAR HAZARIKA,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, S/O DIMBESWAR HAZARIKA, D.K. ROAD, NORTH
LAKHIMPUR, DIST-LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM, PIN-787001
VERSUS
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, DISTRICT OFFICE NORTH
LAKHIMPUR, K.B. ROAD, NORTH LAKHIMPUR, DIST-LAKHIMPUR,
ASSAM, PIN-787001
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P D NAIR
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. V. K. SINGH, SC, F C I
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
ORDER
Date : 27-09-2021
Heard Mr. P.D. Nair, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr.
V.K. Singh, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. This an application
under article 227 of the Constitution of India, whereby the order dated
21.01.2021, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Lakhimpur in Mis (J) Case No.
Page No.# 2/3
13/2020, arising out of Money Suit No. 03/2019 is put to challenge.
The respondent verify a money suit against the petitioner and on the date fixed for
filing list of witnesses, the petitioner could prepare the list of the witnesses. Therefore,
the petitioner filed a petition u/s 148 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with
section 151 of the said code praying for allowing him to file the list of witnesses. The
aforesaid petition was registered as Mis(J) Case No. 13/2020. Thereafter, on
21.01.2020, the learned Court below after hearing both sides rejected the prayer of
the petitioner.
It appears that the learned trial Court has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court that was rendered in 'Lalitha J Rai vs Aithappa Rai reported in (1995) 4
SCC 244' para 4 of the aforesaid judgment as quoted as under:
"4. It would, thus, be seen that the legislature did not put a total
prohibition on the party to produce the witnesses or the production of the
documents for proof of the respective case. Nonetheless, when they seek
the assistance of the Court, they are enjoined to give reasons as to why
they have not filed the application within the time prescribed under Rule 1
of the Order 16. It is seen that in the application it was stated by the
husband of the appellant that they were under the bona fide impression
that they have already filed the list of the witnesses along with the
documents and that the mistake of non-filing the list was discovered when
they were getting ready for the trial. It is not in dispute that the trial is yet
to begin. In these circumstances, we think that the trial court committed
illegality in refusing to receive the list for summoning the witnesses for
adduction of evidence by the plaintiff. The appeal is accordingly allowed.
The order of the trial court and the High Court are set aside. The list
already furnished is a valid list. The trial court is directed to summon the
witnesses for examination on behalf of the plaintiff. No costs."
I have given my anxious consideration to the submission made by the learned counsel
for both sides.
The Court of law has the single duty, it is to administer justice to the people.
Page No.# 3/3
Procedural law is always the handmaid of justice. More particularly, the Civil Courts
being court of equity should not take hyper technical approach while administering
justice. Though the Court below relied upon Lalitha J Rai (supra), but the ratio laid
down therein has not been followed in true spirit.
After hearing both sides, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner might suffer
prejudice if he is not allowed to file the list of witnesses. The prayer of the petitioner is
allowed.
It is hereby directed that the on 27.10.2021, the petitioner shall file the list of
witnesses, before the trail Court.
With the aforesaid direction the petition stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
