Skip to content


Mahadeo Vs. Kalloo and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported in73Ind.Cas.494
AppellantMahadeo
RespondentKalloo and anr.
Excerpt:
civil procedure code (act v of 1908), section 151 - inherent powers of court--decree, setting aside of. - u.p. zamindari abolition & lands reforms act, 1951 [act no. 1/1951]. section 3(4) & u.p. land revenue act, (3 of 1901). sections 14-a (3) & 14; [s.rafat alam, r.k.agarwal & ashok bhushan, jj] expression collector- held, it includes additional collector. powers and functions of collector can be exercised by additional collector under section 198(4) of 1950 act, provided he has been so directed by collector of the district. [1996 aihc 3628 overruled]. - section 151 is intended for exceptional cases for which there is no remedy except the use of the. i, therefore, allow the revision and set aside the order complained of......date for final hearing. if the learned judge had made a mistake in overlooking evidence, the plaintiff had a remedy open to him by application for review under order xlvii of the code. when that remedy was open, it appears to me that the learned judge had no jurisdiction under section 151 of the code to set aside what, subject to review, was a final decree. section 151 is intended for exceptional cases for which there is no remedy except the use of the. court's inherent powers. it is not intended to enable courts to avade or ignore the provisions of. law which govern their procedure. i, therefore, allow the revision and set aside the order complained of. the respondent is unrepresented and the applicant does not press for his costs.
Judgment:

Daniels, J.

1. This is an application for revision of an order passed by the learned Judge' of the Small Cause Court, Allahabad, under the following circumstances:

In Small Cause Court Suit No. 2891 of 1922 on the case coming on for hearing the plaintiff himself was in attendance but had no witness present. The Pleader for the defendant was also present. The learned Judge dismissed the suit for want of proof. The learned Judge afterwards discovered, or it was brought to his notice, that there was some documentary evidence on the record in support of the plaintiff's claim. He, thereupon, of his own motion and without any application set aside his own decree and fixed a fresh date for final hearing. If the learned Judge had made a mistake in overlooking evidence, the plaintiff had a remedy open to him by application for review under Order XLVII of the Code. When that remedy was open, it appears to me that the learned Judge had no jurisdiction under Section 151 of the Code to set aside what, subject to review, was a final decree. Section 151 is intended for exceptional cases for which there is no remedy except the use of the. Court's inherent powers. It is not intended to enable Courts to avade or ignore the provisions of. law which govern their procedure. I, therefore, allow the revision and set aside the order complained of. The respondent is unrepresented and the applicant does not press for his costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //