Madras High Court
Vijayakumari vs V.Jacob Nixon on 28 July, 2022
Author: R.N.Manjula
Bench: R.N.Manjula
C.M.P.Sr.No.72155 of 2022
in C.R.P.(PD).No.2047 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 28.07.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
C.M.P.Sr.No.72155 of 2022
in
C.R.P.(PD).No.2047 of 2022
Vijayakumari ... Petitioner/Respondent
..Vs.
V.Jacob Nixon ... Respondent/Petitioner
Prayer :- Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 151 CPC to
re-open the above Civil Revision Petition in which orders were reserved
by this Court on 05.07.2022 for the purpose of an opportunity of hearing
to the petitioner/respondent in the revision.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Mayilnathan
ORDER
This is about the maintainability of the Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed to re-open the above Civil Revision Petition, which has been reserved for orders..
Page No.1/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.Sr.No.72155 of 2022 in C.R.P.(PD).No.2047 of 2022
2. The petitioner herein is the respondent in the Civil Revision Petition filed by the defendant. After the Civil Revision Petition was reserved for orders, the present petition is filed to re-open and to hear the respondent once again. Now, the maintainability of the petition filed to re-open after the judgment reserved is being dealt.
3.Normally, the Civil Revision Petitions are filed before the High Court either by invoking the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 115 CPC or the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227 of Constitution of India.
4. For a better appreciation, it is appropriate to extract Section 115 CPC:
115. Revision : The High Court, in cases arising out of original suits or other proceedings of the value exceeding one lakh rupees, and the District Court, in any other case, including a case arising out of an original suit or other proceedings instituted before the commencement of the Code of Civil Procedure (Orissa Amendment) Act, 1991, may call for the record of any Page No.2/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.Sr.No.72155 of 2022 in C.R.P.(PD).No.2047 of 2022 case which has been decided by any Court subordinate to the High Court or the District Court, as the case may be, and in which no appeal lies thereto, and if such subordinate Court appears ;
(a) to have exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or
(b) to have failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or
(c) to have acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity, the High Court may make such order in the case as it thinks fit [Provided that the High Court shall no, under this section, vary or reverse any order made, or any order deciding an issue, in the course of a suit or other proceeding, except where?
(a) the order, if it had been made in favour of the party applying for revision, would have finally disposed of the suit or other proceedings, or
(b) the order, if allowed to stand, would occasion a failure of justice or cause irreparable injury tothe party against whom it was made.] [(2) The High Court shall not, under this section, vary or reverse any decree or order against which an appeal lies either to the High Court or to any Court subordinate thereto.''
5. While exercising revisional jurisdiction, the High Court is expected to do adopt the procedure of calling for the records of a case Page No.3/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.Sr.No.72155 of 2022 in C.R.P.(PD).No.2047 of 2022 which has been decided by any Court Subordinate to the High Court, where no appeal lies.
6. The supervisory power of the High Court is exercised under Art.227, when it appears that the Court below had exercised any error in jurisdiction or failure to exercise the jurisdiction or acted illegally with material irregularity.
7. While conducting the proceedings by virtue of Section 115 CPC and Article 227 of Constitution of India, the High Court does not need to conform to any specific procedure, like the procedure adopted by the Civil Courts while conducting the proceedings.
8. The distinction can be made better if reference to Order XVIII CPC is made. Order XVII C.P.C sets down the procedure under which a case should be heard before the Civil Court. The above provision is exhaustive and it lists down how opportunities should be granted to both sides and how a trial should be conducted and concluded. While hearing Page No.4/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.Sr.No.72155 of 2022 in C.R.P.(PD).No.2047 of 2022 the suit and examining the witnesses in accordance with Order XVIII CPC, occasions may arise to re-open the examination of witnesses, after the trial was concluded and the case is shifted to the stage of arguments and rarely on such petitions the trial would pass order for re-opening.
9. If a suit has crossed the stage of arguments and stands posted for judgement, no petition to re-open the case, can be filed before the Civil Court also. In this context it is relevant to refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in Arjun Singh Vs. Mohindra Kumar and Ors and reported in [AIR 1964 SCC 993]. In the said Judgement it is held as under:
“20. ..... In the present context when once the hearing starts, the Code contemplates only two stages in the trial of the suit: (1) where the hearing is adjourned or (2) where the hearing is completed. Where, the hearing is completed the parties have no further rights or privileges in the matter and it is only for the convenience of the Court that Order XX. Rule 1 permits judgment to be delivered after interval after the hearing is completed.''
10. Now it is needless to state that the procedures for hearing set Page No.5/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.Sr.No.72155 of 2022 in C.R.P.(PD).No.2047 of 2022 down under Order XVIII CPC will apply only to those cases tried before the Civil Court or also for any other cases tried before any other forum for which Civil Procedure Code is applicable.
11. Even while hearing those cases, which fall under the procedure contemplated under Order XVII C.P.C, if the case is reserved for judgment, it is at the discretion of the Judge either to pronounce the judgment on the same day or to pronounce it at any future date. After the hearing is completed and the matter is reserved for judgement, there is no question of re-hearing or re-opening the case and the rules do not provide for the said possibility.
12. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure. Section 151 CPC deals with residuary powers of the Courts. As per Section 151 CPC, the Courts have inherent powers to make such orders as may be necessary in the interest of justice or to prevent abuse of process of the Court. Despite the Code of Civil Page No.6/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.Sr.No.72155 of 2022 in C.R.P.(PD).No.2047 of 2022 Procedure does not define 'Court', it defines the word 'Order' under Section 2(14) C.P.C. The above provision reads as follows :
''Section 2(14) CPC : "Order" means the formal expression of any decision of a Civil Court which is not a decree.''
13. It is also worthwhile to add that as per Section 2(8) CPC, 'Judge' means the Presiding Officer of the Civil Court. So the residual powers under sec.151 is available to make only those orders as defined under sec.2(14) of CPC and they are obviously the orders of the Civil Courts.
14. In the case on hand, a Civil Revision Petition was filed by invoking the powers of the High Court under Article 227 of Constitution of India, which is apparently the superintendence power of the High Court. For a better understanding, Article 227 of Constitution of India, is also extracted:
227. Power of superintendence over all courts by the Page No.7/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.Sr.No.72155 of 2022 in C.R.P.(PD).No.2047 of 2022 High Court:
(1) Every High Court shall have superintendence over all courts and tribunals throughout the territories interrelation to which it exercises jurisdiction (2) Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provisions, the High Court may
(a) call for returns from such courts;
(b) make and issue general rules and prescribe forms for regulating the practice and proceedings of such courts; and
(c) prescribe forms in which books, entries and accounts shall be kept by the officers of any such courts (3) The High Court may also settle tables of fees to be allowed to the sheriff and all clerks and officers of such courts and to attorneys, advocates and pleaders practising therein: Provided that any rules made, forms prescribed or tables settled under clause ( 2 ) or clause (3) shall not be inconsistent with the provision of any law for the time being in force, and shall require the previous approval of the Governor (4) Nothing in this article shall be deemed to confer on a High Court powers of superintendence over any court or tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to the Armed Forces.
15. Again, while the High Courts perform the functions under Art. 227 of Constitution of India, there is no necessity to conform to any specific procedure. The High Court at at its discretion can call for the Page No.8/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.Sr.No.72155 of 2022 in C.R.P.(PD).No.2047 of 2022 records if it is felt so or peruse the available records and pass orders, though in practice, notices are being given to the respondent and submissions of both parties heard. When such an opportunity is granted it is upto the parties to utilise and make submissions. Once the matter is reserved for orders, there is no question of granting one more opportunity. At the risk of repetition, it is reiterated that the question of re-opening the case will not arise, once the matter is reserved for judgment/orders.
16. When this petition filed to re-open was returned by stating that it is not maitainable, the learned counsel for the petitioner re-presented it by alleging that the request of the respondent to submit certain citations and written submissions did not find favour with the Court and hence the petition to re-open should be taken on file. During the course of hearing, if this Court feels that citations produced by the counsel are not applicable or not necessary and also that the matter does not require any written submissions, it ends there and the rest is just to Page No.9/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.Sr.No.72155 of 2022 in C.R.P.(PD).No.2047 of 2022 wait for the orders.
17. Since the parties does not have any right or privilege to re-open the case, after the case is reserved for judgment, no procedure is laydown in this regard.
18. In view of the above discussions, it is needless to reiterate that the petition filed in the above fashion, to re-open the matter which has been already reserved for orders, is not maintainable.
19. Accordingly, C.M.P.Sr.No.72155 of 2022 is rejected as not maintainable.
28.07.2022 Index:Yes Speaking Order:Yes ms Page No.10/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.Sr.No.72155 of 2022 in C.R.P.(PD).No.2047 of 2022 To The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras.
Page No.11/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.Sr.No.72155 of 2022 in C.R.P.(PD).No.2047 of 2022 R.N.MANJULA, J.
ms C.M.P.Sr.No.72155 of 2022 in C.R.P.(PD).No.2047 of 2022 28.07.2022 (2/2) Page No.12/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis