Petition u/s151 of cpc & article226/227of constitution
Pradyot
(Querist) 04 March 2015
This query is : Resolved
What is the differance between petition u/s151 of CPC and petition under Article 226/227 of constitution.
Can person file petition u/s151 of cpc in national commission for consumer disputes in Delhito sqash the nc order obtained by respondant by perjury
and also petition under Article 226/227 in High Court for denying of fundamental rights in same case
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 04 March 2015
1. section 151 of cpc is power of civil courts to pass orders in interest of delivery of justice.
2. articles 226/227 of constitution of india
are meant for filing of SLP/ WRIT petitions in HC/SC.
3.u will have to file SLP in SC to quash the order of NC.
Guest
(Expert) 04 March 2015
Agree with Shri Nanda ji.
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 05 March 2015
Only SLP lies in SC to quash order of NC. Petition u/s 151 cpc has no maintainability.
Pradyot
(Querist) 11 March 2015
On the basis of following SC judgement can I file petition u/s151of cpc in any court
1) It is worthwhile to record the striking obsewrvation of Hon’ble SC in the case of A.V. PAPAYYA SASTRY & ORS versus Govt of A.P. & Ors – (2007) 4 SCC 221 –
Now, it is well settled principle of law that if any judgment or order is obtained byFraud, it cannot be said to be a judgment or order in law. Before three centuries, Chief Justice Edward Coke proclaimed; "Fraud avoids all judicial acts, ecclesiastical or temporal".
order obtained by playing fraud on the Court, Tribunal or Authority is a nullity and non est in the eye of law. Such a judgment, decree or order by the first Court or by the final Court has to be treated as nullity by every Court, superior or inferior. It can be challenged in any Court, at any time, in appeal, revision, writ or even in collateral proceedings.
Fai It is thus settled proposition of law that a judgment, decree or lure to conform to the principles of natural justice would make a judicial or quasi judicial order void and such an Order cannot be validated by the appellate or Revisional order. Ponkunnam Traders V Addl ITO , Kottayam (1972) 83 ITR 508;
Addl ITO V Ponkunnam Traders ( 1976) 102 ITR 366 ( Ker HC DB).
