It is settled principle of law that the procedural law cannot fail to provide relief when substantive law gives the right. The Principle hidden under this verbal texture is - there cannot be any wrong without a remedy. In M.V. Elisabethand others. vs. Harwan Investment & Trading Pvt. Ltd., [1993 Supp.(2) SCC 433], the apex court has observed that where substantive law demands justice for the party aggrieved and the statute has not provided the remedy, it is the duty of the court to devise procedure by drawing analogy from other systems of law and practice.

2. The apex court in DhannaLal vs. Kalawatibai and others, [(2002)6 SCC 16], has also envisaged the similar proposition that wrong must not be left un-redeemed and right not left unenforced.

3. In MurlidharAgarwal and another vs. State of UP and others [(1974(2)SCC 472], while dealing with the concept of public policy, the apex court in para 32 has observed as hereunder:-

"32...The difficulty of discovering what public policy is at any given moment certainly does not absolve the Judges from the duty of doing so. In conducting an enquiry, as already stated, Judges are not hide-bound by precedent. the Judges must look beyond