Introduction
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) lays down detailed procedures for conducting civil trials. However, no statute can foresee every possible situation that may arise during litigation. To address such exceptional circumstances and to ensure complete justice, the legislature has recognized the inherent powers of the court under Section 151 CPC.
Section 151 acts as a safety valve, enabling courts to pass orders necessary to meet the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process 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.”
Meaning of Inherent Powers
Inherent powers are those powers which are not expressly provided in the CPC but are inherent in every court by virtue of its judicial function. These powers are exercised to:
-
Do real and substantial justice, and
-
Prevent misuse of the judicial process.
These powers are residual in nature and can be invoked only when no specific provision of the CPC applies to the situation.
Scope and Object of Section 151 CPC
The object of Section 151 CPC is twofold:
-
To secure the ends of justice, and
-
To prevent abuse of the process of the court.
Courts use this provision to fill procedural gaps where the CPC is silent, provided such exercise does not conflict with any express provision of law.
When Can Inherent Powers Be Exercised?
Courts may exercise inherent powers under Section 151 CPC in the following circumstances:
-
When there is no specific provision in the CPC to deal with the issue
-
To prevent multiplicity of proceedings
-
To correct procedural injustice
-
To recall orders obtained by fraud or misrepresentation
-
To ensure that litigation is not used as a tool of harassment
Limitations on Inherent Powers
The inherent powers under Section 151 CPC are not unlimited. The courts have consistently held that:
-
Section 151 cannot override express provisions of the CPC
-
It cannot be used where a specific remedy is available under the Code
-
It cannot be exercised in a manner contrary to legislative intent
-
It cannot create substantive rights where none exist
Important Judicial Pronouncements
-
Manohar Lal Chopra v. Rai Bahadur Rao Raja Seth Hiralal (AIR 1962 SC 527)
The Supreme Court held that courts have inherent powers to grant injunctions even when specific provisions do not apply, provided such exercise is necessary in the interest of justice. -
Padam Sen v. State of Uttar Pradesh (AIR 1961 SC 218)
It was held that inherent powers cannot be exercised in conflict with or contrary to the express provisions of the CPC. -
Arjun Singh v. Mohindra Kumar (AIR 1964 SC 993)
The Supreme Court clarified that inherent powers are not meant to override procedural law but to supplement it where necessary.
Practical Examples of Use of Section 151 CPC
-
Staying proceedings to prevent parallel litigation
-
Recalling an order passed without giving an opportunity of hearing
-
Correcting clerical or procedural errors where Section 152 is not applicable
-
Preventing abuse of process through repeated and vexatious applications
Difference Between Section 151 and Other Procedural Powers
While provisions like Order XXXIX (Injunctions) or Order XLVII (Review) are specific, Section 151 CPC is general and residual. It operates only when no other provision adequately addresses the issue at hand.
Conclusion
Section 151 CPC is a vital provision that empowers civil courts to ensure justice is not defeated by procedural technicalities. However, its use must be careful, sparing, and justified, keeping in mind that inherent powers exist to supplement—not supplant—the CPC.
The consistent judicial approach emphasizes that inherent powers should be exercised only in exceptional circumstances where justice demands intervention beyond the express provisions of the Code.
