Where case records have been irretrievably lost due to circumstances such as fire, and parties are unable to reconstruct the same despite being given opportunities, the appeal may be dismissed with liberty to restore if cause survives. This approach upholds procedural propriety and is a binding precedent for similar situations within the territorial jurisdiction of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | ITA/192/2004 of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs M/S PUNJAB WOOL COMBERS LTD |
| CNR | PHHC010513202004 |
| Date of Registration | 08-07-2004 |
| Decision Date | 30-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISPOSED OF |
| Judgment Author | JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral) |
| Concurring or Dissenting Judges | HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN, J. (Concurring) |
| Court | High Court of Punjab and Haryana |
| Bench | Justice Jagmohan Bansal, Justice Harpreet Kaur Jeewan |
| Precedent Value | Binding within the territorial jurisdiction of the Punjab and Haryana High Court |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms the principle of disposal where records cannot be reconstructed |
| Type of Law | Procedural law (Income Tax Appeal; Civil procedure) |
| Questions of Law | Whether an appeal should be dismissed when record of the case is destroyed and unreconstructable |
| Ratio Decidendi |
Where case files have been destroyed (in this instance, by fire) and neither the department nor parties can reconstruct the record despite being given ample opportunity, it indicates lack of intent to pursue the matter further. In such a situation, dismissal of the appeal is appropriate, with liberty granted to the appellant to move for restoration within a specified period, should a cause survive. The approach ensures judicial resources are not expended on irretrievable matters but also does not prejudice parties’ rights in the event the record is reconstructed. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | In 2011, a fire in the High Court premises destroyed many files including the present one. Attempts by the office and directions to the parties to reconstruct the record were unsuccessful. The department confirmed lack of records and expressed no instructions to proceed, reflecting a loss of interest in pursuing the appeal. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within the territorial jurisdiction of Punjab and Haryana High Court |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts facing similar procedural circumstances |
| Follows | Affirms the procedural approach of dismissing cases where records cannot be reconstructed and parties have lost interest. |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Where case records are destroyed and neither the department nor the parties can reconstruct the file, the High Court may dismiss the appeal.
- Appellants are granted liberty to seek restoration within a specified period (six months), if subsequent cause or record is discovered.
- Emphasizes the necessity for parties to act promptly in reconstructing court records when natural calamities or accidents cause loss.
- Lawyers facing similar loss of record situations may cite this as binding precedent on procedural dismissal with liberty to restore.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court recorded that in 2011, a fire gutted High Court records, including the present appeal.
- The office made attempts to collect and reconstruct necessary documents, but no documents could be recovered or produced.
- Despite being granted ample opportunities to reconstruct the file, neither party came forward with reconstructed records; the department expressly stated no record was available and had no instructions to proceed.
- Observing lack of initiative and interest, the court dismissed the appeal.
- However, the court preserved the right of the appellant to restore the appeal within six months, should cause survive and records later be found or produced.
- This approach balances procedural finality with fairness to avoid prejudice from unavoidable loss of record.
Arguments by the Parties
Appellant (Commissioner of Income Tax):
- The learned junior panel counsel for the appellant stated she had no instructions.
- Informed the court that the department has no records pertaining to the case.
Respondent:
No submissions recorded by the respondent in the judgment.
Factual Background
In 2011, a fire broke out in the premises of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, resulting in the destruction of numerous files, including the present income tax appeal. The High Court’s office attempted to reconstruct the file and gave both parties opportunities to furnish the necessary documents. The department confirmed its inability to provide any record or further instructions. With the matter pending for years with unsuccessful attempts at reconstruction, it appeared the parties had lost interest in pursuing the appeal.
Statutory Analysis
- No specific statutory provision is interpreted or discussed in detail in the judgment.
- The discussion centers around the procedural disposition of appeals in instances where the record has been destroyed and reconstructing the case file is not possible, reflecting practice and precedent regarding abuse of process and judicial economy.
- The liberty to restore within a defined time window preserves substantive rights if new facts or records surface.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
The judgment is authored by Justice Jagmohan Bansal, with Justice Harpreet Kaur Jeewan concurring. No separate dissenting or concurring opinion or additional nuance is recorded.
Procedural Innovations
- Court grants an explicit time-bound liberty (six months) to move for restoration if the cause survives after dismissal for want of record, setting a structured procedural safeguard.
- Ensures both procedural efficiency and preservation of legal rights in circumstances of accidental record loss.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Court applies well-established procedural principles for case disposal when records are lost and cannot be reconstructed, while safeguarding right to restoration.