Courts Must Be Vigilant To Prevent Procedural Errors That Can 'Undo' Legal Proceedings: J&K High Court

A bench of Justice Rahul Bharti underscored the grave consequences of procedural errors, which could potentially nullify years of legal efforts, stating,

“.. there is both a duty as well as a need for the presiding officers of the courts/tribunals to be unblinkingly watchful in date to date conduct of the legal proceedings so as to rule out and eliminate scope of any error, advertent or inadvertent, which may have consequences of reversal of the entire run of legal proceedings at any given point of time”

The court made these observations in a case arising from a motor vehicle accident in 1998, involving a tipper vehicle, which tragically resulted in the death of Mst. Taja Bano. Her husband and two minor children filed a compensation claim before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Baramulla, leading to an award of ₹3,29,200/- in their favor on March 24, 2011.

In terms of its award MACT Baramulla rested the liability for payment of compensation unto the insurer, i.e United India Insurance Company Ltd., thereby giving the benefit of insurance indemnification in favour of the owner and driver of the offending vehicle.

Aggrieved of the same both the Insurance Company as well registered owner filed appeals.

Adjudicating upon the matter Justice Bharti found that Abdul Rashid Kuboo, the registered owner of the offending vehicle, was never served with notice of the claim petition, which is a basic requirement in legal proceedings. Despite being named as a respondent, there was no record of any summons or notices sent to him.

Justice Bharti pointed out that the lower court wrongly assumed his presence due to the appearance of an advocate who had not filed the necessary vakalatnama on behalf of Kuboo. This was a clear procedural flaw, as the tribunal proceeded without verifying the service of notice, which led to the wrongful assumption that the respondent was present, he observed.

Observing that the Ex-Parte proceedings were without proper basis, the court said that MACT, Baramulla, proceeded ex parte against Kuboo despite the absence of any legal basis for such a decision. The Court highlighted that the presence of an advocate for Kuboo was incorrectly recorded in the court's order, but there was no proper legal representation.

The failure to serve the proper notice or ensure valid representation resulted in an unjust ex-parte decision against the appellant. The Court stressed that such procedural casualness could severely undermine the integrity of the legal process, he maintained.

The Court stated that the MACT's decision to shift the liability of compensation entirely to the insurer, without ensuring that the registered owner was properly informed and had an opportunity to defend his position, was a serious flaw.

Justice Bharti did not mince words when discussing the serious impact of such procedural errors. He noted,

“A procedural casualness on the part of a court/tribunal in the conduct of legal proceedings is a matter which impregnates a serious lacuna in the legal proceedings, having an instant and constant potential of upsetting the entire course of legal proceedings whatsoever comes to take place even up to the stage of final disposal of a given legal proceeding.”

The Court further emphasized that such flaws cannot be excused, especially when they affect the fairness of legal outcomes.

Given the gravity of these procedural errors, the Court set aside the award passed by the MACT, Baramulla, specifically concerning the issue of liability between the registered owner and the insurer. The Court remanded the matter back to the MACT for a fresh adjudication on this issue, ordering that both parties be given an opportunity to present their evidence and pleadings.

Case Title: Abdul Rashid Kuboo Vs Gh. Hassan Khan & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 317

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment