Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 151,O.XVIII,r.2,O.XLVII,r.1

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)----- ---S. 151-Court has inherent power to review interlocutory orders relating to matters of mere procedure-Such orders are not within purview of O. XLVII, r. 1, Civil P. C.-Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XVIII, r. 2 (Lahore amendment). With respect to procedural matters there exists in the Court inherent jurisdiction to review, alter or amend orders relating to them. The grounds, however, on which this inherent jurisdiction has to be exercised are similar to those in Order XLVII rule 1, only the technicalities of Order XLVII will be excluded. The plaintiff was not ready with her evidence on the date fixed for that purpose but wanted an adjournment which was refused and the Court passed an order closing the case of the plaintiff. The Court, then, adjourned the case for recording evidence of the defendant. In the meantime the presiding Officer of the Court was transferred. On the next hear­ing the plaintiff put in an application praying that she should be allowed to make her own statement as a witness. This application was opposed by the defendants. The Court after hearing the parties, came to the conclusion that there being already an order passed by his predecessor closing the case of the petitioner, he could allow the application of the plaintiff only if the conditions mentioned in Order XLVII, rule 1 Civil P. C. for review of the order of his predecessor existed. Held, that the order closing the plaintiffs evidence was not within purview of O. XLVII, Civil P. C. and the Court had inherent power either to review it or to pass such other or further order as it thought it. Order XLVII relates to review of s and such interlocutory orders are not s in that sense. Moreover, Order XVIII, rule 2 (Lahore amendment) gave a specific power to the Court to allow the examina­tion of witnesses in spite of the fact that evidence had been closed. Robert Cameron Chamarette v. Mrs. Phyllis Ethel Chama­rette A I R 193,7 Lah. 176 ; Bal Bajaram Padval v. Maneklal Mansukhbhai and others A I R 1932 Bom. 136 ; Anantharaju Shetty v. Appu Hegade A I R 1919 Mad. 244; Deen Dayal Puramanick v. Ram Coornar Chowdhry and others 10 Suth. W R 345 ;…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492