Inherent powers

  1. Remand of the case will prolong the matter unnecessarily — Cause has been pending in the Courts for last 12 years — Held: We would like to decide the merit of the case ourselves to do complete justice. Anwar Hussain and 2 others v. Manzoor Ahmed and 2 others 2000 SCR 89 (B)
  2. Contention of petitioner, that the Court has inherent jurisdiction to pass any order for the purpose of doing complete jurisdiction under O.XLIII rules I and 5 of Supreme Court rules, as such the period of limitation can be condoned by exercising inherent jurisdiction, repelled — Inherent powers can be restored to if there is no specific provision on the statute book dealing with a situation — If contention is accepted; it tantamount to render the whole law on the statute book as redundant because in that eventuality every litigant can advance argument that he could not prove his case legally but in the interest of justice he is to be given relief by invoking the inherent powers. Mujahid H. Naqvi v. Director/Deputy Director Anti-corruption & 4 others 2001 SCR 272 (F)
  3. This Court under section 42-A of the AJ&K Interim Constitution Act, 1974 read with O.XLIII R.6 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1978 has got wide powers to issue such directions or pass such orders or decrees as may be felt expedient for doing complete justice in any case or matter pending before it — In the present case it is felt proper to have first the wisdom of the Service Tribunal — Case remanded with the direction that Service Tribunal shall decide the case within one month. Ashiq Hussain and 3 others v. Muhammad Iqbal Chaughtai 2001 SCR 551 (B)
  4. When a remedy is available to a party by way of appeal or revision, the inherent powers cannot be exercised in favour of that party. Ajaib Hussain and another v. Zareen Akhtar and 11 others 2001 SCR 545 (B)
  5. Conduct of appellants throughout during the proceedings has been negligent and indolent, as such they never deserved that inherent powers should have been exercised in their favour by the High Court or by this Court — The matters of the plots in dispute stands finally concluded by the judgment of this Court, therefore, the same could not have been reopened either by the High Court or by this Court. Ajaib H. and another v. Zareen Akhtar and 11 others 2001 SCR 545 (C)
  6. Ordinarily in cases where judgment is found faulty we remand the case to the concerned Court or Tribunal for fresh hearing and judgment — In this case remand order shall cause further financial burden to the parties as appeal before the Tribunal was not filed in accordance with law — Appeal decided by Court itself. Abdul Haq Mughal v. M. Naseer Usmani and others 2002 SCR 146 (B)
  7. Inherent powers are to be used sparingly where the interest of justice so demands — The inherent powers are invoked only when no other remedy is available to the litigants and such a situation arises that a Court of law cannot resort to any other provision of law except inherent powers. AJ&K University v. Mir Alam and 43 others 2002 SCR 292 (D)
  8. Remedy of appeal was available to respondents — Rejection of application for impleading them in the line of appellants was very much within their knowledge but they preferred not to file appeal in the Supreme Court — Now they cannot blame anyone else except themselves that they had been sleeping over their rights and when period of lodging appeal elapsed and a valuable right accrued in favour of opposite party, they came forward with an application requesting that the High Court should exercise its inherent powers in their favour. AJ&K University v. Mir Alam and 43 others 2002 SCR 292 (E)
  9. Supreme Court normally does not pass order in exercise of its inherent powers — Every case should be allowed to proceed according to normal provision of law — Otherwise it will tend to circumvent the process of law — Held: The learned Chief Justice of the Shariat Court has rightly not invoked the powers under section 561 Cr. P.C — Powers under said provision of law can be invoked in the interest of justice for which no other provision is provided in law.  Zafar Ahmed Usmani  v. Javed Iqbal & 10 others 2005 SCR 18 (A)
  10. S. 42-A of the AJK Interim Constitution Act 1974 read with Order XLIII rule 5 of the Supreme Court Rules if a proper case is made out the Supreme Court can recal an order or to re hear a cause or can even treat a judgment as a nullity. Raja Muhammad Akram Khan v. Azad Govt. & others 2005 SCR 425 (A)
  11. Inherent powers can be exercised where judgment or order of the Court is patently illegal, for instance the judgment is against a dead person or a patent illegality apparent on the face of record. Raja Muhammad Akram Khan  v. Azad Govt. & others 2005 SCR 425 (C)
  12. For doing complete justice the Supreme Court can exercise its powers under section 42-A of AJ&K Interim Constitution Act, 1974 read with O.XLIII, r.5 of Supreme Court Rules, if a proper case is made out — Supreme Court can recall an order or to rehear a cause or can even treat a judgment as nullity. Raja Muhammad Akram khan v. Azad Govt. & others 2006 SCR 214 (A)
  13. Law lulls a person who sleeps over his right and the Courts must not exercise their inherent powers in favour of such a person. Raja M. Akram khan v. Azad Govt. & others 2006 SCR 214 (B)
  14. Inherent powers can be exercised where judgment or order of the Court is patently illegal, for instance the judgment is against a dead person or a patent illegality apparent on the face of record. Raja Muhammad Akram khan v. Azad Govt. & others 2006 SCR 214 (C)
  15. O.XLIII, Rule.5 — AJK Supreme Court Rules, 1978 — exercise of inherent powers — only pending matters — there is no case pending before this Court and we have observed in a number of cases that the applications like one in hand cannot be independently  entertained. The powers vested with this Court have to be exercised according to the constitution and law with relation to the cases pending before this Court. M. Ikhlas v. Ehtesab Bureau & others 2015 SCR 1430 (B)
  16. Scope and extent. Mst. Nighat Srwar v. Mst. Shabana Kausar & others 2017 SCR 158 (B,D&G)
  17. —Exercise of—UMSIT—matter of appointments— discrimination—candidate appointed more in number than the advertised posts in others departments except department of public administration—Held:for the ends of justice and to eliminate the discrimination, the appellant and respondents No.6 and 8 shall be treated on equal footing as the candidates of other departments have are treated—The Court ordered the UMSIT while exercising inherent powers for doing complete justice and enforcement of fundamental rights and eradication of discrimination to appoint the appellant, respondent No.6 and 8. Qurat-ul-Ain vs UMSIT Kotli & others 2018 SCR 994 (C)
  18.        —See caption Ayesha Nazir v. Abida Ghufar & others 2019 SCR 417 (B)
  19.                 Exercise of—see Chaudhary Muhammad  Saeed V. Haji Javed Akram 2020 SCR 617 (A)
  20. — exercise of — see Imtiaz Hussain Shah & 15 others versus Secretary Public Works & others 2023 SCR 625  (A)
error: Content is protected !!