Section 151 CPC, Discretionary powers a Judge
🔹 Section 151 CPC – Inherent Powers of the Court
⚖️ Text of Section 151, CPC:
“Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect the inherent power of the Court to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the Court.”
✅ Key Elements:
| Element | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Inherent Power | Power not explicitly mentioned in CPC, but implied to allow courts to do justice. |
| Ends of Justice | Used to ensure fairness and equity in exceptional situations. |
| Prevent Abuse of Process | Stops misuse of legal procedures by parties for unjust gains. |
| Discretionary Power | Judge decides based on fairness, not strict legal rules. |
🔍 Nature of Powers under Section 151
Discretionary: The judge uses their own judgment based on facts, equity, and justice.
Supplementary: These powers support the CPC, but cannot override express provisions.
Situational: Invoked only when no specific remedy or procedure is provided in the CPC.
🔧 When Can Section 151 Be Invoked?
Some common situations include:
| Scenario | Example |
|---|---|
| Recall of orders obtained by fraud | If a party tricks the court into passing an order. |
| Stay of proceedings to avoid duplication | When two suits on the same issue are pending. |
| Restoration of cases dismissed for default | When there’s no specific provision covering the situation. |
| Correcting procedural irregularities | Like clarifying an ambiguous order. |
| Preventing miscarriage of justice | Where strict CPC application may harm fairness. |
❌ Limitations of Section 151
Cannot override explicit provisions of the CPC.
E.g., If Order 9 Rule 13 CPC provides for setting aside an ex-parte decree, you must use that, not Section 151.
Cannot be used to re-argue decided matters.
Cannot create rights or obligations not otherwise available in law.
Must not conflict with statutory law or settled precedent.
⚖️ Discretionary Powers of a Judge Under Section 151
| Judge’s Discretion Includes... | But Must Not... |
|---|---|
| Acting fairly to fill legal gaps | Violate express provisions of CPC |
| Preventing injustice in unique situations | Act arbitrarily or with personal bias |
| Ensuring justice even if CPC is silent | Replace or ignore procedural safeguards |
🧾 Important Case Laws
Manohar Lal Chopra v. Rai Bahadur Rao Raja Seth Hiralal (1962)
→ Courts have inherent power where CPC is silent, unless explicitly barred.
K.K. Velusamy v. N. Palanisamy (2011)
→ Section 151 is not a substitute for other provisions; it fills procedural gaps.
Arjun Singh v. Mohindra Kumar (1964)
→ Inherent powers cannot be exercised when specific remedies exist in CPC.
🔚 Conclusion
Section 151 CPC empowers judges with discretionary authority to act in the interest of justice, but only when the Code does not provide a specific remedy. It is a safety valve — not a substitute — for proper procedure.
RELATED Blog
0 comments