Facts
The applicants, impleaded as Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 in the main writ petition [WP(C) No. 425 of 2022], approached the High Court seeking the modification of a procedural order
Source reference: p. 3By an order dated November 20, 2023, the Court had closed the opportunity for these respondents to file their counter-affidavit
Source reference: p. 3The applicants contended that the inability to file their response caused significant prejudice to their case
Source reference: p. 3Consequently, they prayed for the reopening of the opportunity to file their counter-affidavit to ensure their defense was properly recorded
Source reference: p. 3Issues
1. Whether the Court should exercise its discretion to modify a previous order closing the right to file a counter-affidavit in order to meet the ends of justice
Source reference: p. 3Law Applied
The Court primarily relied upon the principle of "ends of justice" and the inherent power of the Court to regulate its own proceedings to ensure a fair adjudication
Source reference: p. 3This principle mandates that procedural technicalities should not typically override the right of a party to be heard, especially when the absence of a defense would cause undue prejudice
Source reference: p. 3Reasoning
The Court evaluated the applicants' claim of prejudice alongside the procedural history of the case
Source reference: p. 3It observed that neither the original petitioner nor the other respondents offered any "strong opposition" to the prayer for modifying the previous order
Source reference: p. 3The Court reasoned that for the "end of justice," it was necessary to allow the applicants to place their counter-affidavit on record to ensure a comprehensive hearing of the merits
Source reference: p. 3Consequently, the Court found it appropriate to modify the restrictive nature of the previous order to facilitate the completion of pleadings
Source reference: p. 3Holding
The Court allowed the application, answering the core issue in the affirmative
The Court held that the interest of justice outweighed the procedural lapse
Source reference: p. 3It modified the prior order (noted as 10.07.2023 in the text) to read: “Filing of Counter Affidavit on behalf of the respondent Nos. 6 & 7 is allowed”
Source reference: p. 3The Court directed the applicants to file the said counter-affidavit definitely within the next fixed date and disposed of the petition
Source reference: p. 3Original Court PDF
Rofiqul Islam Mondal and AnrvsSOFIQUL ISLAM
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in