JUDGMENT Jasbir Singh, J. - Vide order under challenge, evidence of the petitioner- plaintiff was closed by order. Counsel states that on the date fixed, petitioner, on account of some gap of communication with his counsel failed to bring evidence in Court. He further states that for summoning of two witnesses, who are yet to be examined, he moved an application. He also deposited the diet money in the Court. Despite that no summon was issued to those witnesses. It has further been averred the suit of the petitioner is for recovery and if he is not allowed to conclude his evidence, he shall suffer an irreparable loss. 2. By referring to above-mentioned fact, a prayer has been made that may be, subject to costs, one effective opportunity be granted to the petitioner to conclude his evidence. Prayer made has been vehemently opposed by Shri Jatinder Singla, who has put up appearance on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 3 to 7. 3. This Courts feels that Rules and procedure are handmaid of justice to enhance the same and not to subvert it. 4. Their Lordships of Supreme Court in Sardar Amarjit Singh Kalra (dead) L.Rs. and others v. Parmod Gupta (Smt.) (dead) by L.Rs. and others, (2003)3 S.C.C. 272, in para 26 of the judgment had opined as under :- "Laws of procedure are meant to regulate effectively, assist and aid the object of doing substantial and real justice and not to foreclose even an adjudication merits of substantial rights of citizen under personal, property and other laws. Procedure has always been viewed as the handmaid of justice and not meant to hamper the cause of justice or sanctify miscarriage of justice." 5. View extracted above, was reiterated by their Lordships of Supreme Court in N. Balajit v. Virendra Singh and others, (2004)8 Supreme Court Cases 312, wherein after noting ratio of the judgment, referred to above, in para 10 of the judgment, it was observed that the procedure would not be used to discourage the substantial and effective justice but would be so construed as to advance the cause of justice. 6. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case and ratio of the judgments referred to above, this revision petition is allowed. Order under challenge is set aside. Trial court is directed to give one more effective opportunity to the petitioner to complete his evidence. 6. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case and ratio of the judgments referred to above, this revision petition is allowed. Order under challenge is set aside. Trial court is directed to give one more effective opportunity to the petitioner to complete his evidence. Petitioner may get assistance of the Court to serve the witnesses and if despite service, he failed to complete his evidence, this revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed. Order passed is subject to payment of Rs. 3,000/- as costs to be paid by the petitioner to the respondents on the next date of hearing before the trial Court. Petition allowed.