Reference to High Court: Section 113 CPC

Articles

Reference to High Court: Section 113 CPC

January 21, 2025

Section 113 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, empowers subordinate courts in India to refer a case to the High Court for its opinion when a substantial question of law arises. This mechanism ensures uniformity in legal interpretations and prevents errors in judgments that may not be rectifiable later.

LEGAL PROVISIONS AND PROCEDURE

Section 113 of the CPC states:
“Subject to such conditions and limitations as may be prescribed, any Court may state a case and refer the same for the opinion of the High Court, and the High Court may make such order thereon as it thinks fit.”

The proviso to this section mandates that if a court is satisfied that a case pending before it involves a question regarding the validity of any Act, Ordinance, or Regulation, and is of the opinion that such Act, Ordinance, or Regulation is invalid or inoperative, but has not been so declared by the High Court or the Supreme Court, it shall refer the matter to the High Court.

Order XLVI of the CPC outlines the procedure for such references:

Formulation of Question: The subordinate court must formulate the precise legal question and refer it to the High Court.
Stay of Proceedings: The court may either stay the proceedings or pass a decree contingent upon the High Court’s decision on the referred question.
High Court’s Opinion: The High Court, after considering the question, provides its opinion and communicates it to the referring court.
Final Disposal: The subordinate court disposes of the case in accordance with the High Court’s opinion.

ESSENTIALS FOR REFERENCE

For a valid reference under Section 113, the following conditions must be satisfied:

Pending Case: There must be an ongoing suit, appeal, or proceeding before the subordinate court.
Question of Law: A substantial question of law must arise during the proceedings.
Court’s Opinion: The court must entertain a reasonable doubt regarding the legal question.
Absence of Binding Precedent: The legal question should not have been previously decided by the High Court or the Supreme Court.

CASE LAWS ILLUSTRATING SECTION 113

L.S. Sherlekar v. D.S. Agarwal, AIR 1968 Bom 439
- Facts: The subordinate court made a reference to the High Court on a question of law that was deemed frivolous.
- Issue: Whether the High Court can direct the referring judge to personally bear the costs for an unwarranted reference.
- Held: The Bombay High Court held that if the reference is deemed altogether unwarranted, the High Court has the discretion to direct the referring judge to personally bear the costs.
Diwali Bai v. Chhote Lal, AIR 1953 Nag 144
- Facts: A subordinate court referred a case to the High Court questioning the validity of a legislative provision.
- Issue: Whether the reference was maintainable under Section 113.
- Held: The Nagpur High Court emphasized that the object behind the provisions of reference is to empower the subordinate court to obtain the opinion of the High Court in non-appealable cases when there is a question of law, so that any commission of error could be avoided which couldn’t be remedied later on.

OBJECT AND SCOPE

The primary objective of Section 113 is to enable subordinate courts to seek the High Court’s opinion on complex legal questions, thereby ensuring consistency in judicial decisions and preventing potential miscarriages of justice. This provision acts as a safeguard against erroneous interpretations of law by lower courts.

LIMITATIONS AND CONDITIONS

While Section 113 provides a mechanism for reference, it is subject to certain conditions and limitations:

Discretionary Power: The power to make a reference is discretionary and should be exercised judiciously.
Not a Right of Parties: Parties to a suit cannot demand a reference as a matter of right; it is the court’s prerogative.
Existence of Doubt: The court must have a genuine doubt regarding the legal question; frivolous or hypothetical questions should not be referred.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

In contrast to the Indian legal system, where subordinate courts can refer questions of law to the High Court, some jurisdictions follow different approaches. For instance, in the United States, the “certification” process allows federal courts to seek guidance from state supreme courts on state law questions. This mechanism, though similar in purpose, operates under different procedural rules and is used sparingly.

CONCLUSION

Section 113 of the CPC serves as a vital tool in the Indian judicial system, promoting uniformity and accuracy in legal interpretations. By allowing subordinate courts to seek the High Court’s opinion on substantial questions of law, it helps in maintaining the integrity of judicial decisions and upholding the rule of law.

REFERENCES