Section 151 CPC

Section 151 CPC

The Calcutta High Court reported in Bhagat Singh v. Jagbir Sawhney, AIR 1941 Cal 670, Lord Williams J. considered the scope of Section 151, and held thus –

“The Code is not exhaustive; there are cases which are not provided for in it, and the High Court must not file its hands and allow injustice to be done. The law cannot make express provisions against all inconveniences, and the Code has, therefore, in many cases where the circumstances warrant it, and the necessities of the case require it, to act upon the assumption of the possession of an inherent power to act ex debito justitiae and to do that real and substantial justice and the administration of which alone it exists.”

The Full Bench of the Madras High Court in Century Flour Mills Ltd v. S.Suppiah and another, 1975 (1)MLJ 54, held that ‘the inherent powers of the High Court under Sec.151 of the CPC are wide and are not subject to any limitation.’

Judgment obtained by fraud on court:

The Supreme Court in Indian Bank v. Satyam Fibers (India) Pvt Ltd., 1996 (5) SCC 550 held that –

“The judiciary in India also possess inherent power, specially under Section 151 CPC to recall its judgment or order if it is obtained by fraud on court. In the case of fraud on a party to the suit or proceedings, the Court may direct the affected party to file a separate suit for setting aside the decree obtained by fraud. Inherent powers are powers which are resident in all courts, especially of superior jurisdiction. These powers spring not from legislation but from the nature and the constitution of the tribunals or courts themselves as to enable them to maintain their dignity, secure obedience to its process and rules, protect its officers from indignity and wrong and to punish unseemly behavior. This power is necessary for the orderly administration of the court’s business.

Where the Court is misled by a  party or the court itself commits a mistake which prejudices a party, the court has the inherent power to recall its orders.