The inherent powers of the court under Section 151, Civil P. C. can be exercised for the ends of justice, provided such exercise of power does not conflict expressly or impliedly with any provisions of the Civil P. C. in respect of the self-same matter.

Judgement

ORDER :- The petitioners filed Money Suit No. 144 of 1973 in the court of the Munsif, Jajpur for recovery of Rs. 2,046.06. They filed their plaint with deficit court-fee and took time to pay the balance. Time was granted till 12-7-1973 for payment of court-fee. In default of payment of court-fee on 12-7-1973 the plaint was rejected under O. 7, R. 11, Civil P. C.

2. The petitioners thereafter filed an application under Section 151, Civil P. C. for recalling the order dated 12-7-1973 and to permit them to pay the deficit court-fee. This petition of theirs was registered as Misc. Case No. 147 of 1973. The ground shown for recalling the order was that the petitioner No. 1 Balaram Naik was looking after the case on behalf of all the petitioners in the trial court and he fell ill with filarial fever and become completely immobile four days before the date fixed for payment of court-fee and in consequence of such illness he was not able to take steps for payment of court-fee on the scheduled date.

3. The petitioner No. 1 examined himself and one witness in proof of his illness since 8-7-1973 till 12-7-1973. Though the learned Munsif was inclined to accept this plea of illness, nevertheless, he refused to recall the order rejecting the plaint on the sole ground that the petitioner No. 1 failed to show that he took any steps for payment of court-fee between 12-5-1973 and 7-7-1973; in other words, in determining whether there was sufficient cause for the default on the material date, he took into account the past conduct of the petitioner No. 1. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid order of dismissal of the petition under Section 151, Civil P. C. the present revision application has been filed.

4. This revision petition was filed on 6-3-1974, 5 days beyond the expiry of the period of limitation. A petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was also filed along with this revision application for condonation of delay. By order dated 27-3-1974 notice on the question of admission and hearing was directed to be issued. The question of limitation was also directed to be considered at the time of admission. The revision petition was heard on merits with the consent of parties as also on the question of limitation. Mr. Patra for the opposite party has filed a counter to the petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and has also raised a preliminary point that the petition for restoration under Section 151, Civil P. C. was not maintainable in law.

5. I will now proceed to examine the merits of Mr. Patra s contention as regards the maintainability of the petition under Section 151, Civil P. C. This section provides :-

"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." The Supreme Court in the case of Manohar Lal Chopra v. Seth Hiralal, AIR 1962 SC 527, has clearly stated that the inherent powers of the court are in addition to the powers specifically conferred on the court by the Code. They are complementary to those powers and therefore it must be held that the court is free to exercise them for the purposes mentioned in Section 151, Civil P. C. when the exercise of those powers is not in any way in conflict with what has been expressly provided for in the Code or against the intention of the Legislature. Their Lordships, however, proceeded to caution that the inherent powers are to be exercised by the court in very exceptional circumstances for which the Code lays down no procedure. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the case of Arjun Singh v. Mohindra Kumar, 1964 SCD 715 : (AIR 1964 SC 993), have proceeded to lay down the following dictum:

"It is unnecessary to embark on any detailed or exhaustive examination of the circumstances and situations in which it could be predicated that a Court has the inherent jurisdiction which is saved by Section 151, Civil Procedure Code