Plaintiff In Title Suit Must Prove Own Case On Independent Evidence, Cannot Rely On Weakness Of Defence: Supreme Court Advocate Commissioner's Failure To Localize Land Per Title Deeds Fatal To Encroachment Claim: Andhra Pradesh High Court Enmity Is A Double-Edged Weapon, Can Be Motive For False Implication As Much As For Crime: Allahabad High Court Parity In Bail: Karnataka High Court Grants Relief To Accused In Robbery Case As Mastermind & Main Offenders Were Already Enlarged Specific Performance Denied If Buyer Fails To Prove Continuous Readiness With Funds; Part-Payment Can't Be Forfeited Without Specific Clause: Delhi High Court Seized Vehicles Shouldn't Be Kept In Police Stations For Long, Courts Must Judiciously Exercise Power To Release On Supurdagi: Madhya Pradesh High Court Prolonged Incarceration Militates Against Article 21, Constitutional Principles Must Override Section 37 NDPS Rigors: Punjab & Haryana High Court Onus On Individual To Prove Claim Of 'Fear Of Religious Persecution' For Exemption Under Foreigners Act: Calcutta High Court Direct Recruits Cannot Claim Seniority From A Date Prior To Their Entry Into The Cadre: Orissa High Court Sale Deed Executed After Land Vests In State Confers No Title; Post-Vesting Purchaser Can’t Claim Compensation: Calcutta High Court No Right To Blanket Regularization For Contractual Staff; State Must Timely Fill Sanctioned Vacancies Under Reserved Quota: Supreme Court Non-Signatory Collaborator Under 'Deed Of Joint Undertaking' Can Invoke Arbitration Clause As A 'Veritable Party': Supreme Court Insolvency Proceedings Cannot Be Used As Coercive Recovery Mechanism For Complex Contractual Disputes: Supreme Court Legal Heirs Who Were Parties To Sale Cannot Challenge Transfer Under PTCL Act After Long Delay: Supreme Court SC/ST Act | Proceedings To Annul Sale Illegal If Initiated By Legal Heirs Who Were Parties To The Transaction: Supreme Court Consumers Cannot Be Burdened With Tariff Charges Beyond Period Of Service Delivery: Supreme Court Mere Non-Production Of Old Selection Records Or Non-Publication Of All Candidates' Marks No Ground To Direct Appointment: Supreme Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeals Against Acquittal In Sohrabuddin Shaikh Encounter Case; Says Prosecution Failed To Prove Conspiracy Dishonour Of Cheque Due To Signature Mismatch Or Incomplete Signature Attracts Section 138 NI Act: Supreme Court 138 NI Act | High Court Cannot Let Off Accused In NI Act Case By Ordering Only Cheque Amount Payment Without Interest Or Penalty: Supreme Court

The inherent power U/S 151 of the CPC can only be used when other remedies are unavailable, according to the Supreme Court.

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Such inherent power cannot negate legal restrictions or enact remedies that are not provided for by the Code. The bench of Chief Justice NV Ramana, Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli stated that invoking Section 151 cannot be used as a substitute for bringing new lawsuits, appeals, revisions, or reviews.

In this case, the plaintiff, who brought the lawsuit in 1953, demanded the division of the 'Asman Jahi Paigah' Nawab's property. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh received this lawsuit in the end and added it to its caseload. A preliminary cum final ruling dated April 6, 1959, issued by the High Court resolved the lawsuit as well as certain related applications in 1959. An appeal was brought in this case by a cooperative society (appellant), who claimed they had acquired a property through an Assignment Deed signed by the earlier predecessor in interest under the preliminary decree. The Single Judge issued a final decree after granting the aforementioned application. Later, a division bench of the Telangana High Court accepted the respondents' appeal and gave them permission to submit a plea to recall the aforementioned final decree. On the merits, the High Court determined that the appellant had acquired the final decision by concealing some material. As a result, the High Court recalled the decree by using its authority under Section 151 CPC.

The appellant argued before the Apex Court that the High Court erred in asserting jurisdiction under Section 151 of the CPC when other CPC remedies are available. Whether a third party to a final decree could submit such applications by using the Court's inherent powers under Section 151 of the CPC was the question under consideration.

The court emphasized that although  the respondents were not parties to the lawsuit, they might have filed an appeal with the Court's permission as an affected party.

Latest Legal News