In Brief
A property dispute suit was dismissed and challenged before the High Court under Article 227, which struck off the entire plaint after finding the documents fraudulent. The Supreme Court set aside this order, holding that Article 227's supervisory powers are extraordinary and discretionary and must be exercised sparingly. When specific statutory remedies exist—such as Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code for rejecting a plaint—the High Court cannot substitute constitutional jurisdiction for those statutory mechanisms. The Court emphasized that supervisory powers cannot replace statutory remedies and must remain a last resort, not a routine alternative forum for civil disputes.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.