§ What it is, and where it comes from

Jurisdiction is the authority of a court to entertain, try and determine a matter. It answers the question asked at the door: may this court deal with this case at all?

Its source is external to the court. It comes from the Constitution and from statute. A civil court's jurisdiction over suits of a civil nature comes from Section 9; a High Court's supervisory and writ jurisdictions come from Articles 226 and 227; the pecuniary and territorial limits come from the statutes constituting the courts and from Sections 15 to 20 of the Code.

It has three ordinary dimensions: over the subject matter, over the territory, and over the pecuniary value of the claim. Special statutes may add a fourth by excluding the civil court's jurisdiction expressly or by necessary implication.

The expression inherent jurisdiction is sometimes used of a superior court's residual authority over its own process, but even there it presupposes that the court is seised of the matter. It is not a power to take up a matter the law has not given it.

📖 Kiran Singh v. Chaman Paswan, AIR 1954 SC 340

The Supreme Court stated the fundamental principle on the consequences of a want of jurisdiction. A decree passed by a court without jurisdiction is a nullity, and its invalidity may be set up whenever and wherever it is sought to be enforced or relied upon, including at the stage of execution and in collateral proceedings. A defect of jurisdiction strikes at the very authority of the court to pass the decree, and such a defect cannot be cured even by the consent of parties. The Court then distinguished defects of pecuniary and territorial jurisdiction, which by the express policy of Section 21 are entertained only where the objection was taken at the earliest opportunity in the court of first instance and a consequent failure of justice is shown.

Rule: want of jurisdiction over the subject matter is fatal and incurable; defects of place and value are curable and are governed by Section 21.

§ What they are, and where they come from

Inherent powers are the means by which a court regulates the conduct of a matter that is already properly before it. They answer the question asked inside the room: how should this court handle this case?

Their source is the nature of a court itself. A body constituted to administer justice must be able to control its own process, and that ability is not derived from any particular enactment.

Section 151 preserves rather than confers. The words are that nothing in the Code shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect the inherent power. The Code is declining to abridge something it did not create.

They are supplementary. They operate where the Code is silent, never against an express provision, never to confer jurisdiction, and never to create a right of appeal, review or revision.

What it answers

Whether this court may deal with this matter at all

How this court should handle a matter it may deal with

Source

The Constitution and statute: Section 9, Articles 226 and 227, the statutes constituting the courts

The nature of a court itself; Section 151 preserves it

Can it be conferred by consent?

No. Parties cannot confer jurisdiction on a court that lacks it, nor take it away from one that has it

The question does not arise; the power attaches to the court, not to the parties' agreement

Can it be enlarged by the court?

No. A court cannot give itself authority the law has withheld

No. It cannot be exercised against an express provision of the Code

Effect of acting without it

The decree is a NULLITY, and may be disregarded whenever it is sought to be enforced: Kiran Singh

The order is IRREGULAR, and is corrected in the ordinary way by appeal, revision or recall

Can the defect be waived?

Not as to subject matter. As to place and value, Section 21 requires the objection to be taken at the earliest opportunity

An objection to the exercise of the power is taken in the proceeding and may be lost by acquiescence

When it is examined

At the threshold, and at any later stage, since it goes to the root

When the order is challenged, on its own merits

§ Three reasons, each sufficient

• The text. Section 151 speaks of the court's power to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of its process. It addresses orders in a proceeding, not the authority to entertain the proceeding.

• The logic. The section preserves a power that a court has because it is a court. A body that has not been given authority over a class of matter is not, as to that matter, a court at all, so there is nothing for the section to preserve.

• The consequence. If Section 151 could supply jurisdiction, the limits the legislature has fixed, on subject matter, on value, on territory, and the exclusions created by special statutes, would be at the discretion of every court. The scheme of Sections 9, 15 to 20 and 21 would be meaningless.

§ The practical formulation

A court with no jurisdiction cannot acquire it under Section 151.

A court with jurisdiction does not need Section 151 to exercise it.

The section operates in the space between: a matter the court may decide, and a step the Code has not provided for, where justice requires an order or the process is being abused.

The court should exercise its inherent power to entertain a suit barred by a special statute

Fails. The bar is one of jurisdiction, and Section 151 cannot lift it

The court should use its inherent power to condone delay beyond what Section 148 allows

Fails. Section 148 has dealt with the subject and fixed a limit; the inherent power does not override an express provision

The court should recall an ex parte order obtained without notice, where no rule fits the situation

Succeeds. This is a step within a proceeding the court may decide, and the Code has not provided for it

The court should consolidate two suits pending before it that raise common questions

Succeeds. The Code provides for transfer and joinder but not for consolidation of pending suits

The court should grant a review on a ground outside Order XLVII Rule 1, in the interests of justice

Fails. Review is expressly provided for on stated grounds, and the inherent power is not an alternative route

The court should stay a proceeding where Section 10 does not apply but the matters are closely connected

Succeeds. Section 10 covers only a defined situation, and the gap is a proper occasion for Section 151