IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3057 of 2011 GOPAL SAH @ GOPAL PRASAD & anr Versus BASDEO PRASAD @ BASUDEO SAH &O ----------- 7 4.5.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. By the impugned order the defence of the petitioner has been closed and case has been ordered to proceed exparte even petitioner defendants have not been able to file W.S. for want of service on them. In this circumstance, if the petitioner is not allowed to defend his right a great injustice will be done to the petitioner. Therefore, this Court set aside the impugned order and directs the trial court to consider the application of the petitioner for recalling of the exparte order and also consider to accept the W.S. in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sambhaji & Ors v. Gangabai & Ors. reported in 2009 PLJR (SC) 286, wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that :- “ A procedural law should not ordinarily be construed as mandatory, the procedural law is always subservient to and is in aid to justice. any interpretation which eludes or frustrates the recipient of justice is not be followed.” Accordingly, the impugned order 2.11.2006 is set aside. The writ petition is disposed of with direction to the trial court to reconsider the petition of the petitioners after giving full 2 opportunity of hearing to both the parties in the light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as quoted above. AnilKrSinha ( Prakash Chandra Verma, J.)