The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's inherent powers under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code to enforce its orders and provide police assistance for the implementation of injunction orders.

Rajiv Sharma, J.

This petition is instituted against the order dated 1.5.2015 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Dehra, District Kangra in CMA No. 187/2015 in Civil Suit No. 75/2012.

2. “Key facts” necessary for the adjudication of this appeal are that petitioners-plaintiffs (herein after referred to as the ‘plaintiffs’ for convenience sake) have filed a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction thereby seeking restraint orders against the respondents-defendants (hereinafter referred to as the defendants” for convenience sake) from changing nature of the suit land in any manner whatsoever and from removing/felling trees from the suit land till the partition and in the alternative mandatory injunction seeking direction to the defendants to restore the original position by demolition of any structure raised. Alongwith the suit, plaintiffs have also moved an application under order 39 rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure for interim injunction.

3. Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Dehra vide order dated 9.4.2015 directed the defendants to show cause why the application be not allowed and in the meanwhile the parties were directed to maintain status quo qua raising any construction, cutting, felling or removing the trees and changing the nature of the suit land till further orders. Civil Judge (Senior Division) also appointed Local Commissioner vide order dated 20.4.2015. The report submitted by the Local Commissioner is dated 21.4.2015 (Annexure P-2). However, fact of the matter is that though the defendants put in appearance on 18.4.2015 but have resumed the construction work on 19.4.2015. It is in these circumstances plaintiffs moved an application under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking police assistance.

4. The application was contested by the defendants. Trial court dismissed the application on 1.5.2015 on the ground that the relief of police assistance was not available even in the event of success of the application under order 39 rule 2-A of the Code of Civil Procedure.

5. The orders passed by the Courts must be complied with in letter and spirit in order to maintain rule of law. The trial Court can not show helplessness in getting its orders executed. The Court has immense power to undo the wrong in the course of administration of justice.

6. All Courts, whether civil or criminal possess, in the absence of any express provision, as inherent in their Constitution, all such powers as are necessary to do the right and to undo a wrong in course of administration of justice on the principle quando lex aliquid alique, concedit, conceditur et id sine quo res ipsa esse non potest (when the law gives a person anything, it gives him that also without which the thing itself cannot exist).

7. The learned Single Judge in AIR 1956 Patna 455 titled as The State of Bihar Vs. Usha Devi and another has held that if a Court comes to the conclusion that an order passed under Order 39 Rules 1 or 2 has been disobeyed and by a contravention of that order the other party in the suit has done something for its own advantage to the prejudice of the other party, it is open to the Court under inherent jurisdiction to bring back the party to a position where it originally stood as if the order passed by the Court has not been contravened. The learned Single Judge has held as under:

“3. Mr. Shahi, appearing for the State of Bihar, has contended that the order is without jurisdiction. According to his contention, the State of Bihar had already taken possession of the land in dispute long before the institution of the suit on 6-3-1954, and, therefore, the overt act, if any, which had been committed by the State of Bihar had not been committed after the passing of the interim injunction. In that view of the matter, the learned Munsif, it has been argued, was not justified to pass the order to redeliver possession. Whatever may be the allegations or counter-allegations of the parties in respect to the present posi