Scroll Top

SUPPLEMENTAL PROCEEDINGS UNDER PART VI OF CPC

SUPPLEMENTAL PROCEEDINGS UNDER PART VI OF CPC

INTRODUCTION:

Justice delayed is justice denied. The term “supplemental” generally means “in addition” to what is already present or available, to complete or enhance it. Part VI of the Code of Civil Procedure from 1908[1] is concerned with supplemental proceedings. The supplemental proceedings are instituted along with the main proceedings in which the pending action is called upon after the institution of suits and prior to their final disposition by the court on various grounds as a means of protecting justice’s end from being defeated. The main object of supplemental proceedings is to give relief to the parties to the suit if any person or defendant creates obstacles to the enforcement of a decree, order, or judgment. Supplemental proceedings offer an exceptional remedy to ensure that the plaintiff’s decree if issued, would be honored. The initiative is designed to ensure that justice’s ends are not compromised[2].

COURT’S POWER TO INSTITUTE SUPPLEMENTAL PROCEEDINGS

Under section 94[3], the court is empowered to institute supplemental proceedings in the following manner:

Arrest before the judgment: A warrant may be issued by the court to arrest the defendant and bring him before the court, prior to the decision being made on the suit. The warrant is issued to justify, that why the defendant is not required to provide security for his appearances and the court may incarcerate him to the civil prison if he violates any security order.[4]

Attachment before judgment: The defendant may be directed by the court to provide security for any property he owns and, if necessary, to place that property at the disposal of the court. Moreover, the court can attach any property it finds fit.[5]

Temporary Injunctions: The court may issue a temporary injunction; additionally, if the offender fails to comply, his assets could be attached and sold by the court. Furthermore, he may be sentenced to civil prison.[6]

Appointment of the receiver: The court may appoint a receiver to hold property on behalf of the defendant and order the defendant’s property to be attached and sold in order to enforce his performance.[7]

Interlocutory Orders: The court is empowered to make other interlocutory orders as it deems just and convenient.[8]

GROUNDS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SUPPLEMENTAL PROCEEDINGS

The grounds on which supplemental proceedings can be implemented are mentioned under orders XXXVIII[9], XXXIX[10], and XL[11], which concern “arrest and attachment before judgment”, “temporary injunctions and interlocutory orders”, along with “appointment of receivers”, respectively.

  • Arrest and attachment before judgment:

Rules 1-4[12], deals with the grounds for arrest before judgment, and rules 5-13[13] deal with an attachment before judgment. Arresting someone before a trial is an extreme and unusual remedy. Therefore, it is important to interpret Rules 1-4[14] rigorously. Before acting under Rules 5-13[15], in order to exercise this power, a court must have reasonable grounds to believe that the defendant would remove himself or his assets outside the court’s jurisdiction if this power is not used. This power cannot be used as an armament by the accuser to pressure the accused into agreeing, nor can it be used to ensure speedy implementation of the judgment.[16] Furthermore, the law protects women from arrest in cases of suits for money recovery.[17]Based on the case of Pellur Venkatasubbamma v. Devvur Narayana Reddi[18], the Court cannot order the attachment of any agriculture production in the agriculturist’s possession. This Order is not an authorization for the plaintiff to apply for any attachment of the agricultural produce by the agriculturist, as nothing in this order should be construed as such.

  • Temporary injunction and Interlocutory orders

Rule 1-5[19] gives provisions for temporary injunction. An injunction is a judicial order aimed at imposing or preventing a specific individual from committing a certain act. Temporary injunctions serve the primary purpose of maintaining the status quo since the action was instituted and prevent any changes until the suit is decided.[20] This relief is intended to prevent future potential harm to a party. The consumer courts do not hold any power to issue the injunction[21]. On the other hand rules, 6-10[22] concern interlocutory orders. As per this order, the court is empowered to order the sale of perishable property under certain circumstances; also any property that is subject to the suit can be, detained, preserved, or inspected. Whenever an order of injunction is made, three factors must be taken into consideration on which the foundation of every order of injunction rests. The undermentioned guidelines are referred to as the “three pillars[23]” of the injunction and are of utmost significance.

  1. Whether the plaintiff’s claims have prima facie validity?
  2. In the event that the temporary injunction is denied, will the plaintiff suffer irreparable harm?
  3. Does the plaintiff’s convenience outweigh the defendant’s convenience?
  • Appointment of receivers

Order XL[24] gives provisions for the appointment of receivers. In General, a receiver[25] can be understood as a person who serves as custodian of a person’s property, finances, or general assets they are appointed by the court, government regulator, or private entity. Typically, the plaintiff in a matter that has been properly constituted applies for the appointment of the receiver. However, a defendant may also request the appointment of a receiver. A stranger or outsider typically cannot apply for the position of receiver. However, someone may also submit such a request if his interest is in protecting, managing, preserving, or improving the property, the application and disposal of such power will rely on the court’s assent[26]. A receiver should be impartial and independent and should not hold any interest in the suit. As a general rule parties to the suits are not appointed as a receiver but this rule is inflexible.[27]

COMPENSATION

Section 95[28] gives provisions regarding compensation for obtaining arrest, attachment, or injunction on insufficient grounds. When the plaintiff fails to establish reasonable or probable grounds for instituting the suit, or when the plaintiff tries to obtain a warrant for the defendant’s arrest on insufficient grounds, based on the defendant’s request, the plaintiff may be ordered to pay an amount not exceeding fifty thousand rupees to compensate the defendant for any costs incurred or damages suffered, including reputational damage.

CONCLUSION

The jurisdiction to issue an order of supplemental proceedings thus depends upon statutes and the power granted to the court thereby[29] also the decree or order passed during supplemental proceedings may cause trouble to the other side, so they must only be relied upon when circumstances dictate a supplemental proceeding and not otherwise[30]. In Ram Shah v. Mastan Singh[31] it was held that in certain circumstances, supplemental proceedings are intended only to protect the interests of the parties, not to advance or advance the suit itself. In the case of Abdul Hamid v. Karim Bux[32] it was held that “on dismissal of a suit in default, the attachment before judgment ceases automatically, so a fresh attachment must be made upon restoration”. The interim order of injunction does not revive when the suit is restored[33]. So to conclude a supplemental proceeding might not decide the fate of the case but it would protect justice’s end from being defeated. 

Author(s) Name: Sanjana Mishra (Shri Ramswaroop Memorial University)

References:

[1] Code of Civil procedure 1908 p. VI

[2] Lanco Infratech Ltd. v Hindustan Construction Company (2016) B. Appeal (COMM.) No. 30/2016.

[3] Code of Civil Procedure 1908, s 94

[4] Code of Civil Procedure 1908, s 94 (a)

[5] Code of Civil Procedure 1908, s 94 (b)

[6] Code of Civil Procedure 1908, s 94 (c)

[7] Code of Civil Procedure 1908, s 94 (d)

[8] Code of Civil Procedure 1908, s 94 (e)

[9] Code of Civil Procedure 1908, ord. XXXVIII

[10] Code of Civil Procedure 1908, ord. XXXIX

[11] Code of Civil Procedure 1908, ord. XL

[12] Code of Civil Procedure 1908, ord. XXXVIII r 1-4

[13] Code of Civil Procedure 1908, ord. XXXVIII r 5-13

[14] Code of Civil Procedure 1908, ord. XXXVIII r 1-4

[15]Code of Civil Procedure 1908, ord. XXXVIII r 5-13

[16] Justice C.K Thakker Takwani, Civil Procedure (9th edition, Eastern Book Company Pvt. Ltd. 2021 ) 352

[17] M/s Chelsia Mills v M/s Choras girl (1991) AIR Delhi 129

[18] Pellur Venkatasubbamma v Devvur Narayana Reddi (1938) 2 MLJ 487

[19] Code of Civil Procedure 1908, ord. XXXIX r 1-5

[20]  Justice C.K Thakker Takwani (n 16)

[21] Morgan Stanley Mutual Funds v Kartick Das (1994) SCC 225

[22] Code of Civil Procedure 1908, ord. XXXIX r 6-10

[23] ‘What are “three pillars” on which foundation of every order of injunction rests?’ (Lawweb, 18 September 2016) <https://www.lawweb.in/2016/09/what-are-three-pillars-on-which.html> accessed 03 November 2022

[24] Code of Civil Procedure 1908, ord. XL

[25]Will Kenton, ‘Receiver’ (Investopedia, 27 March 2021) <https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/receiver.asp> accessed 03 November 2022

[26] Code of Civil Procedure Order 1908, ord. XL r-1(d)

[27] Kasturi Bai v Anguri Chaudhari (2001)Civil Appeal No. 1466/2001

[28] Code of Civil Procedure 1908, s 95

[29] Morgan Stanley Mutual Funds v Kartick Das (1994) SCC 225

[30] Arumugam Chettiar v K.R.S. Sevugan Chettiar (1950) AIR Mad 779

[31]  Ram Shah v Mastan singh and ors (1978) AIR ALL 288

[32] Abdul Hamid v Karim Bux And Ors. (1973) AIR All 67

[33] Vareed Jacob v Sosamma Geevarghese & Ors (2004) Civil Appeal No. 2634/2004