High Court of Meghalaya
Civil Procedure and EvidenceAdministrative and Public Law

Court may modify procedural orders to permit filing of counter affidavits for ends of justice.

Rofiqul Islam Mondal and Anr vs SOFIQUL ISLAM

High Court of MeghalayaJUDGMENT: March 25, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Court may modify procedural orders to permit filing of counter affidavits for ends of justice.. Rofiqul Islam Mondal and Anr vs SOFIQUL ISLAM. High Court of Meghalaya. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

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. 3

By an order dated November 20, 2023, the Court had closed the opportunity for these respondents to file their counter-affidavit

Source reference: p. 3

The applicants contended that the inability to file their response caused significant prejudice to their case

Source reference: p. 3

Consequently, they prayed for the reopening of the opportunity to file their counter-affidavit to ensure their defense was properly recorded

Source reference: p. 3
02

Issues

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. 3
03

Law 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. 3

This 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. 3
04

Reasoning

The Court evaluated the applicants' claim of prejudice alongside the procedural history of the case

Source reference: p. 3

It 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. 3

The 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. 3

Consequently, the Court found it appropriate to modify the restrictive nature of the previous order to facilitate the completion of pleadings

Source reference: p. 3
05

Holding

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. 3

It 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. 3

The Court directed the applicants to file the said counter-affidavit definitely within the next fixed date and disposed of the petition

Source reference: p. 3
High Court of Meghalaya

Original Court PDF

Rofiqul Islam Mondal and AnrvsSOFIQUL ISLAM

High Court of Meghalaya · March 25, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment