Caveat under Section 148A CPC: Legal Shield against Ex-Parte Orders

---

Introduction

Litigation often moves swiftly – sometimes too swiftly for one party to even be heard before an order is passed. To protect against such one-sided orders, the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, introduces an important safeguard under Section 148A – the caveat.

The caveat serves as a pre-emptive legal shield, ensuring that no ex-parte order is passed without giving the caveator (the person lodging the caveat) an opportunity to be heard. In a system guided by the maxim “audi alteram partem” – hear the other side – this provision strengthens the foundation of natural justice.

Meaning and Purpose of Caveat

The term “caveat” originates from Latin, meaning “let him beware.” In legal parlance, it is a formal notice lodged by a person to the court, cautioning that no order should be passed in a particular matter without notice to him.

The main objective of a caveat is preventive – to avoid an ex-parte order, which may otherwise be obtained by a rival party without the knowledge or presence of the caveator.

By introducing Section 148A through the 1976 Amendment Act, the legislature recognized the need to protect the interests of those who may be affected by urgent interim orders such as injunctions, stay orders, or property attachments.

Statutory Provision: Section 148A CPC

Section 148A(1) – Any person claiming a right to appear before the court on the hearing of an application which is expected to be made or has been made in a suit or proceeding, may lodge a caveat.

Section 148A(2) – The caveator must serve notice of the caveat on the person who is expected to make such an application.

Section 148A(3) – Once a caveat is lodged, the court must serve notice of the application on the caveator before passing any order.

Section 148A(4) – The applicant must provide the caveator with copies of the application and supporting documents.

Section 148A(5) – A caveat remains in force for 90 days from the date of filing.

Who Can File a Caveat?

Any person who:

• Has a right to appear before the court at the hearing of an application, and
• Is likely to be affected by any interim or ex-parte order,

can file a caveat.

This includes both parties to a suit (plaintiff or defendant) and even third parties if they can demonstrate a direct or legal interest in the subject matter of the dispute.

In Nirmal Chand v. Girindra Narayan (1978) 4 SCC 43, the Supreme Court clarified that even a stranger to the proceeding can lodge a caveat if he apprehends that his rights may be adversely affected by an order.

Procedure for Filing a Caveat

1. Filing: The caveat is filed before the court where the anticipated application will be made, using a simple petition stating the caveator’s details, the expected case, and the right to be heard.
2. Notice: The caveator must serve a copy of the caveat to the other party (expected applicant).
3. Court’s Duty: Upon receiving the caveat, the court must inform the caveator whenever an application in that matter is filed, and must not pass any order without hearing him.
4. Validity: The caveat remains effective for 90 days. If no application is filed during this period, the caveat lapses automatically.

Practical Importance

The concept of a caveat is extremely useful in preventing ex-parte orders in situations involving:

• Temporary injunctions,
• Interim property attachments,
• Stay of execution of decrees,
• Orders relating to possession or tenancy rights.

For instance, if a property owner anticipates that a tenant might seek a stay order against eviction, filing a caveat ensures that the owner will be notified and heard before any such order is issued.

Judicial Interpretations

1. Kattil Vayalil Parkkum Koiloth v. Mannil Paadikayil Kadeesa Umma, AIR 1991 Ker 381
   • The Kerala High Court held that the object of Section 148A is to ensure that no order is passed behind the back of a person likely to be affected by it.
2. Deepak Khosla v. Union of India, 2011 SCC OnLine Del 4515
   • The Delhi High Court explained that the duty to inform the caveator lies upon the court, and failure to do so renders the ex-parte order procedurally defective.
3. C. Seetharamiah v. Government of A.P., AIR 1987 AP 134
   • The Andhra Pradesh High Court emphasized that a caveat can be filed even before any proceeding has commenced, provided there is a reasonable apprehension of an application being made.

Effect of Lodging a Caveat

Once a caveat is lodged:

• The court cannot pass any ex-parte order in that proceeding.
• The caveator must be notified and given an opportunity to be heard.
• The applicant must furnish copies of the application and documents to the caveator.

Failure to comply with these procedural requirements can lead to the ex-parte order being set aside as violative of natural justice.

Legal Maxims and Principles

• Audi alteram partem – No one should be condemned unheard.
• Ubi jus ibi remedium – Where there is a right, there is a remedy.
• Actus curiae neminem gravabit – An act of the court shall prejudice no man.

These doctrines reinforce the purpose of Section 148A: preventing injustice through one-sided judicial action.

Limitations of Caveat

• The caveat is valid only for 90 days; it must be renewed if the threat persists.
• It cannot stop the filing of an application – it only ensures the caveator’s right to notice.
• Failure to serve notice of caveat to the opposite party can make it procedurally invalid.

Conclusion

The introduction of the caveat system under Section 148A CPC was a landmark reform ensuring transparency and fairness in civil proceedings. It empowers individuals to pre-empt ex-parte orders and reinforces the right to be heard before any judicial action is taken against them.

In an era where interim orders are often sought urgently, the caveat acts as a shield of vigilance – a reminder that justice, while swift, must never be secret.

Thus, for any litigant who anticipates an imminent legal move by an opponent, filing a caveat is not merely procedural prudence – it is strategic self-protection within the bounds of natural justice.

---

Also read: Ex-Parte Decisions under CPC

#CPC #Caveat #CivilProcedure #Section148A #ExParteOrders #NaturalJustice #IndianLaw #LawBlog #ProceduralLaw #AudiAlteramPartem