The need for a liberal construction of 'sufficient cause' under CPC Order IX Rule 7 to enable complete justice between the parties.

ORDER :

1. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the Order dated 09.03.2023 passed in I.A.No. 43 of 2023 in C.O.S.No. 13 of 2022 on the file of Special Court for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes, Vijayawada.

2. Sri K.V.L.Narasimha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant submits that the respondent/plaintiff filed the suit against the petitioner/defendant vide C.O.S.No. 13 of 2022. The said suit is a commercial suit. Summons were sent to the defendant directing to appear in-person on 20.02.2023. Accordingly, he sent his vakalat through Registered Post to his counsel and the said vakalat was delivered to his counsel on 23.02.2023 and due to lack of vakalat and instructions from him, his counsel at Vijayawada was unable to represent the matter on 20.02.2023 before the trial Court. The trial Court was pleased to pass an order setting him ex-parte as no representation in the matter. An application is filed to set aside the order on the ground that the non-representation of the matter neither wanton nor deliberate and it was only due to late arrival of his signed vakalat, his counsel at Vijayawada could not file the same.

3. As against the same, Sri J.U.M.V. Prasad, learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff contends that the petitioner/defendant has sent the vakalat through speed post and it was received by his advocate on 23.02.2023, but he did not mention the date when he had sent the vakalat through post and that petitioner/defendant has dispatched the vakalat through speed post on 21.02.2023 i.e., day after he was set ex-parte on 20.02.2023. Concealing the said fact, he simply stated that vakalat was received by the advocate on 23.02.2023. Thereby, he attempted to mislead the Court by suppressing the facts.

4. In view of the above rival contentions, the issue for decisions is:

“Whether there are any justifiable grounds to set aside the order passed on 09.03.2023 in I.A.No. 43 of 2023 in C.O.S.No. 13 of 2022 on the file of Special Court for Trial and Disposal of Commercial Disputes, Vijayawada?”

5. No doubt, the learned trial judge analyzed the matter, framed the point for determination, thereafter came to conclusion and passed an order for dismissal under application Order IX Rule 7 of Code ofCivil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’)

6. Before determining the said point, this Court intends to refer to the settled law in this type of applications. In Kailash vs. Nanhku, (2005) 4 SCC 480 the Hon’ble Supreme Court at Para No. 28 held that:

28. All the rules of procedure are the handmaid of justice. The language employed by the draftsman of processual law may be liberal or stringent, but the fact remains that the object of prescribing procedure is to advance the cause of justice. In an adversarial system, no party should ordinarily be denied the opportunity of participating in the process of justice dispensation. Unless compelled by express and specific language of the statute, the provisions of CPC or any other procedural enactment ought not to be construed in a manner which would leave the court helpless to meet extraordinary situations in the ends of justice. The observations made by Krishna Iyer, J. in Sushil Kumar Sen vs. State of Bihar, (1975) 1 SCC 774 are pertinent: (SCC p. 777, Paras 5-6)

“The mortality of justice at the hands of law troubles a judge's conscience and points an angry interrogation at the law reformer.

Processual law so dominates in certain systems as to overpower substantive rights and substantial justice. The humanist rule that procedure should be the handmaid, not the mistress, of legal justice compels consideration of vesting a residuary power in judges to act ex debito justitiae where the tragic sequel otherwise would be wholly inequitable. … Justice is the goal of jurisprudence - processual, as much as substantive.”

7. In this context the Bench refers to another judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, while deciding an application under Order IX Rule 7 of CPC, wherein the H