What is the remedy available to an aggrieved party against an order passed under Section 151 (Inherent powers of the courts) of the Civil Procedure Code?

Question: What is the remedy available to an aggrieved party against an order passed under Section 151 (Inherent powers of the courts) of the Civil Procedure Code?

Find the answer only on Legal Bites. [What is the remedy available to an aggrieved party against an order passed under Section 151 (Inherent powers of the courts) of the Civil Procedure Code?]

Answer

An order made under Section 151 is not included in the category of appealable orders.

In 1949 in Venkatagiri Ayyangar v. Hindu Religious Endowments Board, Madras((1949) 51 BOMLR 952), the Privy Council examined the scope of Section 115 and observed that they could see no justification for the view that the section was intended to authorize the High Court to interfere and correct gross and palpable errors of subordinate courts so as to prevent grave injustice in non-appealable cases and that it would be difficult to formulate any standard by which the degree of error of subordinate courts could be measured. It was said:

“Section 115 applies only to cases in which no appeal lies, and, where the legislature has provided no right of appeal, the manifest intention is that the order of the Trial Court, right or wrong, shall be final. The section empowers the High Court to satisfy itself on three matters. The High Court may call for the record of any case which has been decided by any Court subordinate to such High Court and in which appeal lies thereto, and if such subordinate Court appears:

• • to have exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or
  • to have failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or
  • to have acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity, the High Court may make such order in the case as it thinks fit.”

If the High Court is satisfied upon those three matters, it has no power to interfere because it differs, however profoundly, from the conclusions of the subordinate Court upon questions of fact or law.

The Supreme Court in the famous case of Keshardeo v. Radha Kissan [AIR 1953 SC 23] observed that an order passed under section 151 simpliciter is not appellable in view of the provisions made in Section 104 (Orders from which appeal lies), Section 105 (Other Orders) and Order 43, Rule 1 (Appeal from orders). Thus, the remedy available to an aggrieved party against an order passed under section 151 is ‘Revision’ and not Appeal.

Further in Mulraj v. Bhura, AIR 1931 L 344 it was held that if any appeal is entertained against the order passed under section 151, the judgment becomes Coram non-judice.

Again in Md. Akber v. Amar, AIR 1930 L 789, and in Kallu v. Munpal, AIR 1942 order 392 it was held that remedy against an order passed under section 151 is ‘Revision’ in the High Court. Similarly in Dinamani v. Pramananda, AIR 1980 Or 177 (FB) it was held that no appeal lies against an order passed under section 151 but revision is maintainable.

Thus, it is clear from the above decisions that the remedy available to an aggrieved party against the order passed in the exercise of inherent powers under section 151 is ‘Revision’ and not ‘Appeal’.

---

Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

• CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – I of X
• CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – II of X
• CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – III of X
• CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – IV of X
• CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – V of X
• CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – VI of X
• CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – VII of X
• CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – VIII of X
• CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – IX of X
• CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – X of X