Limitation | Delay Condonation Cannot Be An Act Of Generosity: Supreme Court Refuses To Condone 31-Year Delay To Challenge Decree Sentence Suspension In Murder Cases Only Under Exceptional Circumstances; Presumption Of Innocence Erased Upon Conviction: Supreme Court Inquiry Commission Report Cannot Be Used For Disciplinary Action If Statutory Right To Cross-Examine Denied: Gauhati High Court Use Of Trademark On Website Accessible In India Constitutes Domestic Use, Geo-Blocking Mandatory For Territorial Restrictions: Delhi High Court Civil Court Jurisdiction To Interfere With DRT Proceedings Is Absolutely Barred Even For Third Parties: Madras High Court Adding a Prefix Can’t Erase Deceptive Similarity – Delhi High Court Orders Removal of ‘ARUN’ from Trademark ‘AiC ARUN’ Cannot Resile From Mediated Settlement After Taking Benefits: Supreme Court Quashes Wife's DV Case, Grants Divorce Absolute Indemnity Obligation Triggers Immediately Upon Court-Directed Deposit, Not On Final Appeal: Supreme Court Magistrate Directing Investigation Under Section 156(3) CrPC Only Requires Prima Facie Satisfaction Of Cognizable Offence: Supreme Court Cancellation Of Sale Deed Under Specific Relief Act Not A Pre-Condition To Initiate Criminal Case For Forgery: Supreme Court Amalgamated Company Cannot Claim Set-Off Of Predecessor's Losses Under Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act Without Specific Statutory Provision: Supreme Court Overlapping Split Chargesheets May Raise Double Jeopardy Concerns, Supreme Court Notes While Granting Bail To Former Jharkhand Minister Supreme Court Grants Bail To Convicted Ex-Jharkhand Minister Facing Overlapping Prosecutions From Split Chargesheets Electricity Act Appellate Authority Is A Quasi-Judicial Body Subject To High Court’s Supervisory Jurisdiction: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mere Discrepancy In Date Of Birth Across Certificates Doesn't Amount To Fraud If No Undue Advantage Is Derived: Allahabad High Court Interest Earned On Funds Temporarily Parked Pending Project Deployment Cannot Be Taxed As 'Income From Other Sources': Delhi High Court Reference Court Cannot Set Aside Collector's Award Or Remand Matter For Fresh Determination: Allahabad High Court Administrative Transfer Causing Revenue Loss Defies Court Process: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Ferry Ghat Handover Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High 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