CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE:

The law comes into picture when a civil case is being filed like that of a defamation case. The
statute states the procedure to be followed when a civil litigation commences.
The following flowchart needs to be followed for all the civil suits in the civil courts and the
same may or may not be compiled with in the special courts, summary suits and tribunals.

1. Commencement of civil suits/ litigation or institution of suit: begins by filing of a plaint.

So, thus the parties facing a issue, the aggrieved sends a notice to the other before
approaching the court of law. The notice can be sent through registered post with
acknowledgement track due or mail.
There are also situations of receiving the notice and replying and not replying or other case
which is not receiving the notice only in the first place. The other party has to reply for the
same, but when he replies and denies the contents of the civil court that is when the civil
litigation starts or when the person doesn’t reply to the same the litigation commences. If the
other party accepts the content’s then the litigation might not begin.
The notices can be sent by the aggrieved party or by the counsel representing the aggrieved
party. It is not mandatory to issue a notice but the court may question the party who have
instituted the suit as to why they have not issued the notice because it is against the principles
of natural justice. In order to forgo the requirement of notice the party needs a very valid
reason.

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION CLASS ACTION SUITS

It has no statutory backing under Indian

It has statutory backing and is governed
law, it is essentially an invention by the
under US law.
Indian judges.

Procedural requirements are not relaxed.

Procedural requirements are relaxed to
One person presents the claim of others
improve access to justice.
along with his own claim.

A Class-Action Suit is a suit filed by

Any ‘public-spirited individual’, or the similarly placed individuals against a
aggrieved can represent an unrepresented common wrong. A person whose legal
section of the society. right has been violated presents the
matter of similarly affected individuals.

It has a wider outreach as it can be filed in
matters of ‘Public Interest’ which can cover
within its ambit matters of environment,
labour, undertrials, human rights, etc.
Anything that the Court views as public
interest can be entertained. The court has
discretion in exercising these powers.
It has a narrow outreach as it only has
specific applications. It is usually filed
in consumer frauds, securities frauds, or
employment-related malpractices, and
also in cases where large scale losses and
injuries have been caused due to the use
of defective consumer products. There is
no concept to serve a wider public
interest.

1
A “Representative Suit” is a suit filed against one or
more persons on behalf of themselves and others
having the same interest in the suit.
2
In Representative suit, Order I Rule 8 of CPC provides
that when there are number of persons similarly
interested in a suit, one or more of them can with the
permission of the court or upon a direction from the
court, sue or be sued on behalf of themselves and
others.
The person whose fundamental or
legal right has been violated may file
suit or petition for enforcement
thereof.
The Plaintiff has to file the suit in a
court having jurisdiction of the lowest
grade.
In Private Interest Litigation, Plaintiff
has to pay Court stamp fee as per the
valuation of the suit property under
the Court Stamp fee Act

In Representative suit, Following Conditions must In Private Interest Litigation, The

3 exist
1) the parties must be numerous
2) They must have the same interest
3) The Permission must have been granted or
direction must have been given.
4) Notice must have been issued to the parties whom
it is proposed to represent
aggrieved person has to prove that he
has suffered some loss or injury. In
case of alleged violation of right, he
must in addition prove that he has
right.

Institution of a suit: filing of a plaint or a petition in the court of law- commencement of civil
proceedings in the appropriate court of law. Plaint is a document required to institute a suit,
which will result in determination of rights through a decree (order that has force of law),
establishing legal rights. It is always in third person. Plaint always contains prayer plus facts
plus the fee information.
Petitions are to obtain the order of the court, for enforcing already recognized legal rights.
Petitions are also in third person. Petitioner is one who files the petition and the defendant
files the written statement. Filing a plaint is called OS- original suit and filing a petition is
called OP- original petition.
OS- if the statutory act does not specify then the proceedings commence as OS
 OP- Act states then the proceedings commence as OP.
Petitions are the pleadings in the beginning of the suit. Mere allegations are called plaint.

Written statements deny the allegations taken in the plaint, each and every allegation that is
being raised is denied if not denied it means acceptance. The defendant submits his own
prayer by introducing his side of the facts. Even maintainability of the suit is challenged. The
courts jurisdiction will also be questioned by the defendant.

2. Once the petition and the written statement is submitted, the court goes through the plaint
and the written statement placed on the record. Majorly based on the facts and some
provisions.

3. From reading the documents the court gets to know the nature of the dispute. Thus, the
court proceeds towards framing of issues. They are framed based on the facts, written
statement and plaint. Issues refers to the conflict that lies between both the parties. There
is as such no compulsion on both the parties to frame the issues but if either of the parties
wishes to and files the same then it is called draft issues. Even both the parties can draft
the same and can go even without submitting the same to the court, but once submitted
they cannot challenge the draft issues and the court considers the same for actual filing of
issues.

The nature of issues thus drafted can be question of facts, question of law and mixed question
of fact and law which is common in civil suits. Question of fact should always need evidence
to be proved which can oral and supported by witness or by written which is called
documentary evidence. Question of law are proved by judicial precedents.
Constitutional questions and appeals cover only questions of law while all other suits have
mixed questions.

MAINTAINABILITY: LIMITATION OF SUIT:

 For every appeal, there is a limited period, within which appeal should be filed. Such a limitation is provided
Under the Limitation Act, 1963.
 For appeal, in case of a decree passed by lower court in civil suit, the limitation is :
 Appeal to High Court - 90 days from the date of decree Or order.
 Appeal to any other court - 30 days from the date of Decree or order.
 In case there are more than one plaintiffs or defendants, then any one of them can file on appeal against all of
them respectively.
 Merely because an appeal is filed, does not mean that the order or decree of lower court is stayed. In case of
temporary stay of decree or order, it has to be specifically asked, and stay will operate only if court grants it.
 In case of execution of decree, the court, which passed the decree, can itself stay the execution for time being
on sufficient reasons shown.
 The court may require the appellant to deposit some sort of security.
 The appellate court may, on the day fixed for hearing the appellant dismiss the appeal, or issue notice to the
opposite party to appear on next day.
 If on the first day of hearing, appellate court issues summons to the opposite party, then :
 It shall fix a date for next hearing, and such date shall be published in the court house .
 Notice shall also be sent to the lower court, whose decree or order has been appealed.
 To appellant is required to file " Process Fee " which is very nominal in amount, and on such filing, the notice
shall also be sent to opposite party.
 In case of appeal, the one who files the appeal is known as appellant, and against whom it is filed, is known

 Ratio decedendi in the judgement refers to the compensation given by the judge
and the reasoning given by the judge for the same. It has binding force.
 Obiter dicta: casual remarks given by the judge regarding the present state of
affairs in the judgement. Not given by all.

4. Trial stage: a. examination in chief, explains the contents of the plaint or the written
statement and they are examined by their own advocate.
b. re- examination: it is done by the defendants advocate who examines the plaint which
leads to new facts being arisen. Further at the discretion of the court, clarification of
points not mentioned in w/s or plaint is done. When new facts arises then the re-
examination arises. Cross examination can only be done in courts.

When the plaintiff is a minor or is of unsound mind, then the guardian or the legal
representative gives the evidence. In case of recovery of money suits if the wife cannot
give evidence then the husband can give for her. So, these are the situations when the
other person can give evidence on behalf of another.

2000 amendment brought for examination in chief was effected in 2002, prior to the
amendment of 2002, the examination in chief of the witness was recorded in open courts
in the presence of opposite party but post 2002 the examination in chief has to be done by
party calling the witness in the form of a duly sworn affidavit.
Affidavit: written statement voluntarily made by an affiant or deponent( person making
an affidavit or deposition under oath) which is administered by a person who is
authorized to do so by law. Affidavit is always in first person and contains the facts . It
can be standalone or IA.

5. Arguments: The counsels use precedents to prove the question of law.

6. Judgement or decree: Judgement is the complete reasoning or the operating part of the
decree. Every aspect is completely discussed and contains Ratio decidendi. Decree is the
brief part of the judgement which is the formal expression of the judgement, decree to
judgement.

There are certain differences between Judgement, Decree and Order. The decisions given by
the court of law are either orders or decrees. A decree is followed by a judgement that is
pronounced by the court after hearing the case. It is important to note that decree and order
are analogous to each other. A judgment is passed by the court of law on the ground of decree
or order.
Judgement
Under Section 2(9) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 a “judgement” means the statement
given by the Judge on the grounds of a decree or order. Judgement refers to the reasoning
given by the court in order to support the decision. A judgement is said to be the final
decision of the court on the said matter in the form of suit towards parties. Order 20, Rule
4(2) states that a judgement shall contain a concise statement of a case, point for
determination, the decision thereon and all the reasons for such decisions. Order 20, Rule 3 of
CPC says that the judgement must be signed and dated by the judge while declaring it in the
court. Once it is signed by the judge, the judgement is not allowed to be amended except in
cases where there are arithmetical errors due to accidental omission. The provision for the
same is stated in Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Judgement when Pronounced

The Court, after hearing the case shall deliver the judgment in the open court, soon after the
completion of the hearing or on another day fixed by the court for that purpose, of which due
notice will be given to the parties and their pleaders. In cases, where the judgement is not
delivered on the same day, every attempt shall be made by the Court to pronounce the
judgement within 30 days from the date on which the hearing was concluded. There is an
exception to this rule where, under extraordinary circumstances, the judgment might be
extended to 60 days.

Essentials of a Judgement

A judgement should possess all the essentials of the case, reasoning and the basic contention
on which the judgment is delivered.

1. Essentials of the judgment other than that of the Small Causes Court

 A concise statement of the case

 Point for determination
 Decision thereon
 Reason for such decision
 Relief Granted

1. Judgment of Small Causes Court

 Point for determination

 Decision thereon
Review under Code of Civil Procedure

The provisions of review of a judgement are mentioned in Section 114 of the Code. The main
objective is to examine the facts and judgements of the case again. Even though this section
does not contain the limitations and conditions for the review, the same is laid down in Order
47 of the Code which contains 9 rules imposing the various conditions. The following are the
9 rules:

 Application for the review of Judgement

 To whom the application for review may be made
 Form of the application
 Application when rejected
 Application for review in Court consisting of two or more Judges
 Application when rejected under Rule 5
 Order of rejection not appealable. Objection to order granting application
 Registry of granted application
 Bar of certain application

Decree:
Under Section 2(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, “decree” means the formal
expression of an adjudication which conclusively determines the rights of the parties with
regard to all or any of the matters in controversy in the suit and may be either preliminary or
final. A decree must include:

 Rejection of a plaint
 Determination of any question under Section 144 of the Code.

A decree shall not include:

 Any adjudication from which an appeal lies as an appeal from an order

 Any order of dismissal for default.

Essential Elements of a Decree

 There should be an adjudication: It is the most essential feature of a decree. A

former decision of the Judge on the dispute should be there. In the absence of such
judicial determination, there can be no decree.
  Suit: This proceeding is instituted in the Court of Law by filing a plaint in the civil
court. Similar to adjudication, there is no decree without a civil suit. There are
specific provisions that treat certain applications as suits like proceedings
under Hindu Marriage Act, Indian Succession Act.
 Determining the rights of the parties: The adjudication should determine the rights
of the parties in a dispute. The term parties refer to the plaintiff (person instituting the
suit) and the defendant (person against whom the suit has been filed).
 Determination must be conclusive in nature: The determination held by the Court
should be conclusive relating to the rights of the parties. The provisional decisions are
not considered decree.
 There must be a formal expression: To be a decree, there must be a formal
expression of adjudication. In other words, the court must formally express its
decision in the manner laid down by law.

Types of Decree

There are three types of decree as recognised by the Civil Procedure. They are:

 Preliminary Decree - It is passed in cased in which the court has to first adjudicate
upon the right of the parties and further proceedings need to take place before the suit
is in a position to be completely disposed of. Some rights of the parties are decided
some rights are yet to be decided.
 Final Decree - A final decree is where a suit is completely disposed and all the
questions in controversy between the parties are finally settled and there is nothing
remaining to be decided on. A decree may be final in two ways:

1. Where no appeal is filed against the decree within the prescribed time
2. Where the matter has been decided by the decree of the highest court.
3. Where the decree completely disposed of the suit.

Other than the 8 different types of suits in CPC, the other complex types of suits
can have preliminary and final decree’s.

 Partially preliminary and partially final decree - A decree can be said to be

partially preliminary or partially final when it only determines the rights of the parties,
while the rest is left to be worked out in the further proceedings. Mesne profits: profits
from illegal property – illegal possession of property like lease expiry but still stays.
Or sub leasing of illegal property.

Deemed decree- Fictious, rights of the parties have not been decided. Due to rejection of
plaint and restitution of suit. Rejection will amounts to deemed decree which can be
done on 5 different grounds like for eg: suit has been undervalued or subscription not
paid.

Grounds for Rejection of the Plaint: The Indian Civil Procedure Code
The plaint is petitioned for instituting a suit in the civil or commercial courts. A court of
civil jurisdiction will be administered by the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908
(CPC). Order VII of CPC is visualized with the provisions of the dismissal of the plaint by
the Court. This article will talk about the grounds of dismissal, the impediment time
frame after dismissal inside which the plaint should be filed again and other
enlightening things. This procedure is simply a principle which guarantees only the best
possible utilization of the Court Fees Act, 1870.

The court is vested with the duty that, before a suit is established, to appropriately
inspect the plaint, to decide, regardless of whether it ought to be returned, or dismissed
and so as to decide, the subject of dismissal. It is the court’s obligation to take into
consideration, different materials as well, Order VII Rule 11 of CPC describe situations
where plaint ought to be dismissed.

Order VII Rule 11 of CPC explains on the dismissal of plaints in specific circumstances
and conditions. It has referenced certain grounds based on which the courts dismiss the
plaints. One of them is not referencing the reason or the cause of action that the
offended party looks for against the respondent.

It is essential to decide upon the application of dismissal of the plaint under Order VII.
The litigant cannot be forced to record a written statement or a composed proclamation
without settling on such an application if any.

Besides, this rule can be applied at any phase of the procedures. For a situation under
the steady gaze of the Calcutta High Court, Selina Sheehan vs Hafez Mohammad
Fateh Nashib [AIR 1932 Cal 685], the plaint was dismissed much after it was given a suit
number.

The Court must analyze the plaint altogether and decide whether the plaint ought to be
accepted or sent back for offering some reparation to it. In any case, the plaint will
undoubtedly be dismissed by the Court in the accompanying conditions –

 Order VII Rule 11 (a) - When the cause of action is not mentioned in the
plaint

Cause for Action has been referenced under plenty of provisions in the CPC. It is a set of
claims or actualities which compensate for the grounds for accepting a civil suit. One
instance of the cause of action is under Order II Rule 2 of CPC. In that, it has been
expressed that to establish a lawsuit, the reason should be unequivocally referenced to
in the plaint.

If it has not been referenced, at that point the plaint will be dismissed by the Court.

It is the sole motivation behind why a civil suit exists in any case. It determines the
legitimate damage which the individual who is founding a suit has endured. It likewise
has the cure or help which the offended party will request that the Court award.

The individual initiating such suit likewise needs to demonstrate specific components
like: -

1. that there existed an obligation or a duty;

 2. the event of a breach or break of that obligation;
3. the reason for such a breach; and
4. the harms inflicted by the offended party.

Along these lines, if the plaint does not affirm the facts which are required for
facilitating the case of the offended party, the plaint will be expelled by the Court
referring to the justification and grounds for such dismissal.

It is pertinent to note that one person should not be bothered twice for the same cause
of action. The real test for the adjudicating authorities is that the cases falling under
these provisions of CPC must reply the query that the case in the new suit is found upon
an alternate reason for the activity. In any case, the offended party is at full freedom to
discard any piece of the evidence.

For instance, ‘ABC’ rents an apartment from ‘XYZ’ at a lease of INR 100,000 per anum.
The contract for the entire of the years 2015, 2016 and 2017 is still pending and is yet to
be realised. ‘XYZ’ institutes an action against ‘ABC’ in 2019 for asserting the sum which
was expected. The suit was regarding the lease due in 2015. Hence, ‘XYZ’ cannot sue
‘ABC’ subsequently for the rent due for the rest of the years.

The Supreme Court in Alka Gupta vs Narendra Kumar Gupta[(2010) 10 SCC 141]
reiterated on the fact that the cause of action in the preliminary suit was not
compensating the cost under the sale agreement, though, in the subsequent suit, the
reason for activity was non-settlement of records of the partnership that was dissolved.
Order II Rule 2 discovers substance when both the fits depend on a similar cause of
action.

Joint Cause of action

Order II Rule 4 of CPC sets out the circumstances in which the cause of action would not
be joined or heard together except if the Court has permitted doing as such. Following
are the exemptions to the preceding –

 Cases for claiming mesne benefit or amount outstanding of the lease regarding
the claimed property or any part thereof;
 Cases for claiming damages or harms for breach of any agreement under which
the property or any part thereof is held.

Misjoinder of Cause of Action

At the point when the different cause of actions is being brought together in the suit
which cannot be combined, there can be no such joinder. All complaints concerning the
misjoinder of a cause of action should be tended to as early as could be possible. It is a
presumption that if a complaint is not raised against the misjoinder, this privilege is
considered to be waived off.

Subodh Kumar Gupta v. Shrikant Gupta [1993 (3) ALT 59 SC]

There was an organisation firm which had its registered office in Bombay, and the
processing plant was in Mandsaur. Two of the three partners in the firm had their living
arrangements in Mandsaur though one was living in Chandigarh. Subsequently, an
agreement was executed among them for dissolving the firm. Rendering of records of
the firm was likewise mentioned on the supposed misappropriation of the assets of the
firm.

A suit was filed by one of the partners in Chandigarh. The Supreme Court had held that
the Courts at Chandigarh had no kind of jurisdiction in the issue. Courts at Bhilai had
the authority instead of considering the agreement.

K. Thakshinamoorthy vs State Bank of India [AIR 2001 Mad 167]

Upon filing the revision petition against the Additional Judge had dismissed the plaint
because there was no cause of action referenced. The respondents tried to get the
plaint dismissed all things considered. Eventually, the plaint was dismissed on the
grounds of an absent cause of action.

The Relief Afforded Under CPC

Relief must be explicitly expressed in the plaint. Rule 7 of Order VII of CPC necessitates
that a plaint needs to contain the recourse that the offended party claims. It very well
may be anything, for example, harms, a directive, revelation, arrangement of a collector,
and so on.

If an offended party except when permitted by the Court excludes any alleviation to
which he is qualified for sue, he would not be conceded such help a while later. At some
occasions, the Court awards help on an unexpected ground in comparison to express in
the plaint. The help asserted by the offended party or the respondent might be a
general alleviation or an elective alleviation.

Raghwendra Sharan Singh vs Ram Prasanna Singh [AIR 2019 SC 1430]

The cause of action, in this case, had emerged when the offended party challenged the
gift deed after a time of roughly twenty-two (22) years from the date of the execution of
the equivalent. The offended party for the situation has challenged the deed of gift with
the charges that the gift deed is a gaudy one subsequently not authoritative.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court, after hearing the two sides, in perspective on the realities
of the case, held that the Law of Limitation unequivocally restricts this suit. What's
more, the plaint should be dismissed under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC.

 Order 7 rule 11 – Locus Standi

To file a suit, the offended party needs to have a locus standi. One needs to show that
some legitimate right of the individual has been damaged. Such infringement ought to
likewise bring about some damage caused to the individual.
If no lawful right has been disregarded, the individual would not have a locus standi for
recording a suit. The gathering fundamentally can show the Court that there was an
adequate reason for activity behind the documenting of the suit.

The locus standi of the suit relies on whether any grounds were abused which brought
about the dismissal of the plaint.

Pirthi Singh and Ors. vs Chander Bhan and Anr.

In this case, a revision petition was filed by the defendant, who was the petitioner,
against the order of the judge of the junior division. The offended party argued that the
respondent had deluded the Court by expressing an inappropriate fact.

Accordingly, the application was expelled wherein the Punjab-Haryana High Court
expressed that there was no wrongdoing in the request passed by the Ld. Judge. What's
more, consequently the candidates had no locus standi to document the case.
Therefore, such rejection.

 Undervalued relief claimed in the suit.

If it is brought to the knowledge of the court, that the valuation of the suit if fabricated
or baseless, the court can order the plaintiff to re-evaluate the amount and may allow
sufficient time for the correction. Subsequently, the plaint can be rejected if the plaintiff
fails to abide by.

 Insufficient Stamps Under the Court Fee Act, 1870

The recording of the plaint initiates each suit, one of the prerequisites for the correct
institution of the suit is that it must be appropriately stamped for the reasons for the
court fees under the Court Fee Act, 1870. If the plaint is lacking stamp, the court
dismisses the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC and give an adequate time to
explain the reason for disappointments.

Dismissing a Suit as Compared to Rejection of the Plaint

The distinction between the dismissing a suit and rejection of plaint is that there no
particular grounds on which a lawsuit may be rejected. On the off chance that the
request has not been appropriately served upon the litigant, the suit is at risk to be
expelled.

Another ground is that neither one of the parties shows up upon the arrival of hearing,
at that point the Court can make a request dismissing the suit. Order IX of CPC
expresses specific grounds based on which a lawsuit can be rejected. Then again,
rejection of plaint happens just under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC.

 CPC is a thorough resolution which covers the entire methodology which should
be trailed by all the civil courts in India. The plaint is the initial step to recording a
 suit in the court. It should be drafted with due steadiness and diligence. It must
incorporate every one of the points of interest that have been referenced all
together in Order VII. When the statement of the suit appears to be barred
by the law

It is important to note that, when the suit filed appears from as barred by any statute
and gives no such right to the plaintiff for instituting the suit, it shall be liable to be
rejected.

 When the plaint of not filed in duplicate

When a suit is to be instituted, a duplicate copy must be submitted. Failing which, the
court has the right to dismiss or reject the lawsuit.

Two modes of rejecting a plaint

1. The defendant can apply the form of Interlocutory Application at any stage of the
procedures.
2. Suo moto rejection - Order VII Rule 11

By its motion, the court can, on its own, try or reject the suit, if the conditions
mentioned explicitly in CPC, are fulfilled.

To conclude, one needs to understand the following grounds where a plaint can be
rejected: -

1. Where the suit is undervalued

2. Where there is an absence of a cause of action
3. Where any statement in the plaint is such that it is barred by law
4. Plaint is not filed in duplicate

This article is meant for the readers to get an exhaustive comprehension of these
provisions and how it can get value for them to understand. CPC is the most significant
subject for any individual who needs to get in the suit and who needs an added insight
in a typical case.

Aside from this, different utilizations are endorsed in Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to
meet the parts of the bargains counteract unfairness. These applications need to record
with the first reply from the defendant or at some other phase of procedures.

Rejection of a plaint is a deemed decree even though adjudication does not take place
and even though the court has not yet decided the rights of the parties.

Restitution: At the time of judgement the court realises that the judgement has been
wrongly pronounced and thus it orders restitution meaning restores the property.
Rights of the parties are wrongly decided – Section 144. Starting of restitution
proceedings or applying Section 144 is called deemed decree which is not exactly
decree by itself. Execution proceedings: implementation of decree of the suit.

 and return of plaint is not a decree. Like if no jurisdiction means the plaint is
returned to the proper court.

Order

Section 2(14) of the Code defines “order” as the formal expression of any decision of a Civil
Court which is not a decree. All orders are not appealable only some are.

Essential Elements of an Order:

 Formal Expression
 Formal Expression should not be a decree
 The decision must be pronounced by a civil court.

Types of Order

 Appealable Orders: Orders against which an appeal lies. Orders mentioned under
Section 104 and Order 43 Rule 1 of the CPC are examples of appealable orders.
 Non-Appealable Orders: Orders against which a party cannot file an appeal.

Orders can also be classified into:

 Final Order - The Order which finally determined the rights of the parties.
 Interlocutory Order - Provisional orders passed by the Court in the course of the
litigation.

Appeal: is a statutory right and continuation of suit. Appeal can be filed just for the
preliminary appeal. Courts wait for one month which is appeal time after pronouncement.

IA: Interlocutory application, means an application to the Court in any suit, appeal or
proceeding already instituted in such Court, other than a proceeding for execution of a
decree or order. When filed the actual suit proceedings is halted and the court hears this
and conducts enquiry. The person filing is called the petitioner. They file an affidavit
which is an sworn statement which contains only the facts and an petition which
contains the facts and the prayer .The person filing can also be the respondent in the
actual suit proceedings and file the same but when they file the IA they become the
petitioner and the other becomes the respondent. At any stage IA can be filed till the
arguments stage. IA’S can also be used for asking for a document and seeking
temporary injunctions. Even before the institution of suit IA can be filed like in the case
of temporary injunction which is filed for permanent injunction.

: ORDER 17 RULE 01: Adjournment petitions

Response filed by the respondent against the IA filed by the petitioner is a counter.
 a. adjournment
a pause or rest during a formal meeting or trial, or the act of giving a pause or rest:
The defence attorney requested an adjournment.
The court's adjournment means that a decision will not be reached until December at
the earliest.

b. adjudication

An adjudication is a legal ruling or judgment, usually final, but can also refer to the process
of settling a legal case or claim through the court or justice system, such as a decree in the
bankruptcy process between the defendant and the creditors.

Normally, an adjudication represents the final judgment or pronouncement in a case that will
determine the course of action taken regarding the issue presented. Outside of a legal process,
adjudication can also more generally refer to other formal processes of judgment or ruling
that render a final decision, such as the process of validating an insurance claim.

 Adjudication is the process by which a court judge resolves issues between two
parties.
 Adjudication hearings are similar to the arbitration hearing process.
 Generally, adjudication hearings involve money or nonviolent infractions that result
in a distribution of rights and obligations for all parties involved.

SECTION 09- JURISDICTION:

Power of the court to take up, hear and decide the matter. Deals with suits of civil nature. But
purely religious and political suits are not civil nature as per the Section. They might come
under the other provisions of law as civil suit. Main issue being something and these two can
incidently connected to the main issue.
The above two are expressly barred under the Section. As per Section 9 of the Act[1],
the Courts shall have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting
suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred.
However, it is well settled that a civil court has an inherent power to decide
its own jurisdiction[2]. Where a contention as to jurisdiction is raised, it has
to be determined in the light of words of the statute, scheme of provisions as
well as the object and purpose of the enactment[3]. Also, a presumption has
to be made in favour of jurisdiction[4].

 Scope
Every civil suit is cognizable unless it is barred. The wide nature of this
section is explained by use of both positive and negative phraseology. What
is meant by the section is explained by its words and expressions which cast
an obligation on the court to exercise jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of the civil
courts in terms of Section 9 is a plenary one. It is also well settled that the
ouster of civil court’s jurisdiction is not to be readily inferred. A person taking
a plea contrary must establish the same[5]. Every civil court must entertain
only those suits which are of civil nature and have the characteristic of
affecting one’s rights of civil nature.

 The suit must be of a civil nature

The word “civil” has not been defined anywhere in the Code. However,
according to the dictionary meaning[6], it pertains to private rights and
remedies of a citizen. Historically, the two broad classifications were civil and
criminal. Revenue, tax and company and so on were added to it later. There
is thus no doubt about the width of the word ‘civil’. The Section would be
available in every case where the dispute has the characteristic of affecting
one’s rights which are not only civil but also of civil nature. As per article 133
of Indian Constitution, an appeal lies to civil court against any judgment,
decree or order in a ‘civil proceeding’. This expression came up for
construction in S.A.L. Narayan Row v. Ishwarlal Bhagwandas [7]and the
Constitution Bench held that proceedings for relief against infringement of
civil right of a person is a civil proceeding.

 The cognizance of such a suit should not have been expressly or

impliedly barred
As per Section 9 of the Code, the normal rule is that civil courts have
jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature except those of which cognizance
by them is either expressly or impliedly excluded. However, where a statute
impliedly bars the jurisdiction a civil court and confers on a statutory
authority, if such authority travels beyond the jurisdiction, the civil court has
power to entertain the suit in respect thereto[8].

Exclusion of Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction means and includes any authority conferred by the law upon the
court, tribunal or judge to decide any dispute between the parties or pass
judgement or order. Exclusion of jurisdiction means prevention or prohibition
to the court not to entertain or try any matter though the dispute is civil in
nature[9]. The exclusion of jurisdiction of a civil court is to be clear and not
inferred[10]. Also, even when the jurisdiction is either expressly or impliedly
barred, it cannot be said that it is barred altogether. A court has jurisdiction
to examine whether the provisions of the Act have been complied with, or
whether the order is contrary to law, mala fide, ultra vires, arbitrary etc. In
all these cases, the order cannot be said to be “under the Act” but is de
hors[11] the Act and the jurisdiction of a civil court is not ousted[12]. The
jurisdiction is excluded in two ways:

 Suits expressly barred – A suit is said to be expressly barred

when it is barred by any enactment for the time being in force[13].
In the development of adjudication of civil disputes, statutes
provided alternative mode of resolution of civil disputes with less
expensive but expeditious disposal.
A competent legislature may bar jurisdiction of civil courts with respect to a
particular class of suits of a civil nature, only if by doing so, it keeps itself
within the legislative field conferred on it and does not contravene any
provision of the Constitution[14]. If there is any doubt about the ousting of
jurisdiction of a civil court, the court will assume the jurisdiction[15].

Suit based simply on Directive Principles of State Policy as incorporated in

the Constitution of India, are not maintainable[16]. Likewise, political
questions relating to policies are not covered under the expression “civil
rights”. However, a suit for correction in the date of birth in service record
relates to civil right and is maintainable in Civil Court[17].

 Certain Acts with express bar on Civil Court’s jurisdiction

These are some of the acts which expressly bar civil court’s jurisdiction:

 Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions

Act, 1993 – It is evident from Sections 17 and 18 of the Act that
civil court’s jurisdiction is barred only in regard to applications by a
bank or a financial institution for recovery of its debts[18]. Also,
after formation of the DRT, every suit and other proceedings
pending before any civil court in which the claim is in excess of Rs.
20 lakhs shall stand transferred to DRT[19].
 Indian Electricity Act, 2003 – The scheme of the Act is complete
in itself and thereby the jurisdiction of the civil court to take
cognizance of the cases under the Act stood barred. However, it was
laid down that where provisions of law are not complied with or the
forum or tribunal does not act according to the fundamental
principles of judicial procedure, the jurisdiction of civil court is
clearly implied[20].
  Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Where the parties have
submitted their disputes to the Arbitral Tribunal, the same disputes
cannot be permitted to be agitated simultaneously in a civil suit and
the bar laid down under Section 5 of the Arbitration and Conciliation
Act, 1996 and Section 9 of the Code comes into play[21].
 Copyright Act, 1957 – The Act creates a statutory right and
remedy under Section 31(1)(b). It provides forum for enforcement
of the remedy too. Where the Plaintiff has availed of that remedy
and also seeks to avail same remedy from the civil court, the
jurisdiction of the Civil Court would be barred[22].
 Payment of Wages Act, 1936 – A civil court has no jurisdiction to
entertain a suit by an employee against his employer for recovery of
wages, after the expiry of the period of limitation prescribed by
Section 15(2) of the Act for making an application to the Authority
appointed under the Act, or after the Authority has refused to
condone the delay in making such an application[23].
 Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – It was held in CCI Chambers
Coop. HSG. Society Ltd. v. Development Credit Bank Ltd.[24] that
jurisdiction of consumer dispute redressal forum cannot be
relegated to civil court on the ground that the case involves detailed
investigation. Hence, jurisdiction cannot be assumed merely
because questions of fact and law need to be decided, especially in
view of exclusive jurisdiction under the Act.
 Essential Commodities Act, 1955 – Section 6E of the Act, 1955,
specifically bars the jurisdiction of the Civil Court[25].
 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Section 175 of the Act bars the
jurisdiction of the civil courts in respect of claims for compensation
on account of motor accident if the claims Tribunal is constituted in
the area. The jurisdiction of the State Government[26] is exclusive
in character and it is not open to civil courts to issue an order of
injunction restraining the hearing authority from proceeding with
the hearing of the case[27].
 Constitution of India 1950 – In view of Article 329, civil courts
have no power to entertain a suit which challenges the elections to
Parliament or the State Assemblies.
There are also other acts that expressly bar the civil court’s jurisdiction like
Canon Law, Delhi School Education Act, Public Premises Act, Maharashtra
Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, Land
Acquisition Act, Displaced Persons Act, Delhi Municipal Corporation Act,
Bombay Rents Act, Tripura Public Demand Recovery Act, Enemy Property Act
and so on.

 Suits impliedly barred – A suit is said to be impliedly barred when

it is barred by general principles of law. Where, both right and
remedy having been created uno flatu then, even if there is no
express provision excluding the jurisdiction of civil courts, its
 jurisdiction stands impliedly barred[28]. It is also established that
where an Act creates an obligation, and enforces its performance in
a specified manner, that performance cannot be enforced in any
other manner[29]. Similarly, certain civil matters are barred from
civil courts on the principles of public policy[30] and public
weal”[31].

Certain Acts with express bar on Civil Court’s

jurisdiction
 Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – In the matters of industrial
disputes, jurisdiction of civil court is barred only in respect of those
rights/ obligations which are created under this Act or its sister
enactments[32].
 Other Acts – In Haryana, jurisdiction of civil court is barred by
necessary intendment of law in the field covered specifically and
squarely by the provisions of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent
and Eviction) Act, 1973[33]. In another case, it was held that where
the parties have lawfully agreed to refer their disputes to arbitrator,
civil court’s jurisdiction is barred to that extent[34].

Jurisdiction not barred

All suits of civil nature which are neither expressly nor impliedly barred by
any law are maintainable in the civil courts[35]. Where the jurisdiction of
Civil Court is barred by any specific legislation but the ‘issue’ is not covered
under the said legislation, then a suit in civil court would be maintainable. In
cases where alternative remedies are available, civil courts’ jurisdiction as
well as jurisdiction of such alternative fora are not barred[36]. Any state
revenue legislation does not bar jurisdiction of civil court to adjudicate over
dispute relating to title of parties[37]. Civil courts can entertain suits for
which no remedy lies under the specific legislation[38].

General Principles of Exclusion of Jurisdiction

From various decisions of the Supreme Court, the following general principles
relating to jurisdiction of a civil court emerge:

 Civil court has jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature unless their
cognizance is barred either expressly or impliedly.
 Consent can neither confer nor take away jurisdiction of a court.
  A decree passed by a court without jurisdiction is a nullity and the
validity thereof can be challenged at any stage of the proceedings.
 There is a distinction between want of jurisdiction and irregular
exercise thereof.
 Every court has inherent power to decide the question of its own
jurisdiction.
 Jurisdiction of a court depends upon the averments made in a plaint
and not upon the defense in a written statement.
 For deciding jurisdiction of a court, substance of a matter and not its
form is important.
 Every presumption should be made in favour of jurisdiction of a civil
court.
 A statute ousting jurisdiction of a court must be strictly construed.
 Burden of proof of exclusion of jurisdiction of a court is on the party
who asserts it.
 Even where jurisdiction of a civil court is barred, it can still decide
whether the provisions of an act have been complied with or
whether an order was passed de hors the provisions of law.

CONCLUSION
It can be concluded that section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code primarily deals
with the question of civil court’s jurisdiction to entertain a cause. It lays
down that civil court has jurisdiction to entertain a suit of civil nature except
when its cognizance is expressly barred or barred by necessary implication.
Civil court has jurisdiction to decide the question of its jurisdiction although
as a result of the enquiry it may eventually turn out that it has no jurisdiction
over the matter. Civil court has jurisdiction to examine whether tribunal or
quasi – judicial bodies or statutory authority acted within their jurisdiction.
Also, if there arises a question pertaining to jurisdiction of a civil court in
entertaining a matter, every presumption has to be made in favour of the
jurisdiction of a civil court unless the relevant statute expressly provides to
that effect. The burden of proof lays on the party who seeks to oust the
jurisdiction of a civil court. Where such a contention is raised, it has to be
determined in the light of words of the statute, scheme of provisions as well
as the object and purpose of the enactment.

 pecuniary Jurisdiction: In pecuniary jurisdiction, the court decides to

try cases based on its monetary value. It refers to the valuation
done by the plaintiff and is considered for determining the suit. If
the court feels that the valuation done by the plaintiff is not
appropriate then the court would direct the plaintiff to appropriate
 forums. Based on the nature of the dispute. The plaintiff drafts as
he values the suit.
Valuation of the suit: Valuation of a suit is of two types. A suit has to be valued for
two purposes: (1) for determining the pecuniary jurisdiction of the court in
which it should be filed, and (2) for fixation of court fee to be paid.

 The High court of every state decided the pecuniary jurisdiction. The
limitation is placed by them. After 2 years the upper limit is
increased.
Illustration: A sues B for selling him adulterated Product he claims the
compensation worth 25,000 rupees but files a suit in the National
Commission. The National Commission would dismiss the case of A and direct
him to file a suit in the District forum.

 Subject Matter of Jurisdiction: The court is expressly barred from

hearing cases which they are not supposed to try. A court
pronouncing a judgment without having the authority to try the case
the judgment would be held null and void.
Illustration: A sues B for cutting 20 trees in his locality he is supposed to file
a suit in National Green Tribunal if he files a suit in the District Court it would
get dismissed.

 Territorial Jurisdiction In territorial Jurisdiction the court tries those

cases where the offenses are committed in their area of the
jurisdiction where their decree or an order can be enforced.
However, in Lal Modi V DLF Universal Ltd (2005) the Supreme Court
held that even though the court doesn’t have a territorial
Jurisdiction the decision can be pronounced if the other party
agrees.
Illustration: A damages the car of B in Uttar Pradesh he then moves to
Kolkata where he conducts his manufacturing business. A gets the option
either to file a suit in Uttar Pradesh or Kolkata he can’t file a suit in any other
place.

Inherent jurisdiction
Inherent Jurisdiction is an English common law doctrine that refers to the
exclusive authority of the court to hear the matters that come before it
unless restricted by the State. In Bremer Vulkan
Schiffbau and Maschinenfabrik v. South India Shipping Corporation
Ltd (1981), the House of Lords has defined Inherent Jurisdiction as a general
power to control its procedures to prevent it from being used to achieve
injustice.

The Court can use its power of inherent Jurisdiction in four general
situations:
  To present the abuses of the process.
 To ensure convenience and fairness in the legal proceedings.
 To take steps to reduce judicial proceeding inefficacies.
 To act as an aid of the Supreme Court or control of the inferior court
or tribunals.
To try any civil case through the power of inherent Jurisdiction, it needs to
comply with the provision of S. 9 of the Civil Procedure Code.

Section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code: In this section mentions the court can
try any civil case and the court is not expressly or impliedly barred from
taking the cognizance of the suit.

Conditions

 The case tried in the court should be civil.

 The court should not be expressly or impliedly barred from trying
the case.
The suit should be civil in Nature: For the enforcement of the Suit, the case
must involve a violation of private rights. In civil, there arises a dispute
between individuals or organizations the party whose rights are violated then
a compensation amount is awarded. There exists a wide difference between
suits of civil nature and civil cases.

Examples of suits which are of civil nature are as follows:

 Suits for rent.

 Suits for dissolution of marriage.
Suits for the right of franchise.
Examples of suits are not of civil nature are as follows:

 Suit on expulsion from caste.

 Suits involving religious rites and ceremonies.
 The suit involves voluntary payment in the offering.
The Court should be expressly or impliedly barred: Expressly barred refers
to when the legislation restricts the scope of jurisdiction of the civil courts
from restricting to try a particular class of suit. The power of the legislation
should be implemented in such a manner that there is no breach of a
provision of the Constitution. In Shankar Narayan vs K Shreedevi, (1998) the
Supreme Court, in this case, mentioned that civil courts have primary
jurisdiction on all civil matters unless it is expressly or impliedly barred.
Illustration: The parliament passed an Act to form a National Green Tribunal
that expressly bars the sessions Court, High Courts to deal with suits
involving environment violation.

Impliedly barred refers to when a restriction is being imposed on the court by

the general principles of law. If a suit remedy to a person needs to be
provided in a specific manner and then the person a remedy in any other
manner there would be an implied barrier. The court cannot take cognizance
of those cases where the suits are against the public policy. Performance
needs to be enforced in a specific manner then the performance cannot be
executed in any other manner. In Raja Ram Kumar vs Union of India (1998)
while considering implied jurisdiction the Supreme Court observed that if a
right is recognized in common law and if a new statutory remedy is being
enforced both statutory and common law remedies would become
concurrent.

Illustration: If A and B enter into a contract of smuggling drugs A defaults B,

B files a suit in the court which would dismiss the case as because the object
was unlawful the court is barred from trying such suits.

In Hasham Abbas vs Uaman Abbas, in this case, the Judgment was

pronounced being expressly and impliedly barred to try the case. The
Supreme Court held that the decision was null and void.

The presumption of Jurisdiction should not be inferred until and unless a

specific law established by the legislation debars Court from exercising its
jurisdiction.

The burden of proof

The burden of proof is upon the party which claims that the court doesn’t
have the power to try the case. In Abdul vs Bhavani (1996), the Supreme
Court held that every presumption should be made in favour of the civil
court, exclusion of Jurisdiction shall strictly be construed. Where a party
raises such contention he needs to prove various status, relevant provisions,
and object and purpose of the enactment.

General principles associated with Section 9 of the Civil

Procedure Code, 1908
1. A decree passed by the court without having the Jurisdiction would
be null and void.
 2. The presumption of jurisdiction should be made in favour of the civil
court.
3. The burden of proof is upon the party which asserts the exclusion of
jurisdiction.
4. For deciding the jurisdiction substance of the matter is important
and not its form.
5. Jurisdiction of a suit depends upon the claims made by the plaintiff
in the plaint and not upon the written statement.
6. Consent cannot take away or confer the jurisdiction of the suit in a
particular court.

The power of the higher court to review the decision or change the result of the decisions
made by the lower courts is called appellate jurisdiction. The Supreme Court in India is the highest
court of order in the country. It can hear appeals in cases like civil cases and criminal cases.
Original jurisdiction is the
right of a court to hear a case for the first time. It can be distinguished from appellate
jurisdiction which is the right of a court to review a case that has already been heard and
decided upon by a lower court.

 Consent of the parties does not decide or confer the jurisdiction on a particular court
nor takeaway the jurisdiction of a particular court. The plaint decides the jurisdiction.
Lack of jurisdiction: The court does not have the jurisdiction to decide the particular matter.
The judgement given by the court with lack of jurisdiction is Non- est – non- existing which
is null and void.
Irregular exercise of jurisdiction- Matter has come to the competent court but the decision is
erroneous. Wrong decisions maybe pronounced because the facts would have been wrongly
read etc. It has the jurisdiction but the court has wrongly used the same. The judgement thus
passed is valid only, the aggrieved party has to appeal against the erroneous judgment within
30 days.

 Exception to the lack of jurisdiction: Territorial/Pecuniary jurisdiction of the court

lacked but still judgement passed and further proceedings have not taken place then it
is accepted. But when the subject matter jurisdiction is lacking then the judgement is
void ab-intio.

SECTION 15:

1. Suits relating to immovable property

2. Suits relating to movable property
3. Suits of other kinds
 4. Suits relating to torts or other wrongs
The expression ‘place of suing’ signifies the venue for the trial. The same has
nothing to do with the competency of the court. Section 15 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908 requires the plaintiff to file a suit in the court of the
lowest grade competent to try it. Provisions for the immovable property have
been spread over Sections 16 to 18 of the aforesaid Code. Section
19 specifically applies to suits for compensation for wrongs to persons or
movable property. Section 21 of the Code recognizes the well-established
principle that defects as to territorial or pecuniary jurisdiction can be waived.
A substantive suit for setting aside a decree passed by a court on the ground
of want of territorial jurisdiction is expressly barred by Section 21-A of the
Code.

Pecuniary jurisdiction
Section 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 provides that a suit must be
instituted in the court of the lowest grade which is competent to try it. This
rule being of a procedural nature does not affect the jurisdiction of the
courts. Thus, as the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court observed in the
case of Gopal v. Shamrao (1941), a decree passed by a higher court cannot
be said to have been passed without jurisdiction. The two-fold objective of
Section 15 has been provided hereunder:

1. Reduce burdens of the higher courts;

2. Afford convenience to the parties and witnesses who may be called
for examination in such suits.
The jurisdiction of a court under Section 15 is determined by the plaintiff’s
valuation in the plaint and not the amount for which the decree will be finally
passed by the court.

Kiran Singh v. Chaman Paswan (1954)

A bench of Justices Aiyyar and T.L. Venkatarama took into account Section
11 of the Suits Valuation Act, 1887 while deciding the case of Kiran Singh v.
Chaman Paswan (1954). Section 11 of the Suits Valuation Act, 1887 as well
as Sections 21 and 99 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 are based on the
principle that once a case has been tried on its merits and a judgment has
been rendered, it should not be subject to reversal solely on technical
grounds unless there has been a failure of justice.

The Legislature’s approach has been to regard territorial and monetary

jurisdictional challenges as technical matters that should not be considered
by an appellate court unless there has been prejudice on the merits. Whether
or not there was prejudice is a question that must be answered based on the
facts of each instance. When a subordinate court incorrectly assumes
jurisdiction as a result of over-valuation or under-valuation and a resultant
failure of justice, the jurisdiction under Section 11 is an equitable one to be
exercised. It is not feasible nor desirable to define such jurisdiction precisely
or to limit it to certain boundaries.

The Apex Court observed that ‘a party who has resorted to a forum of his
own choice on his own valuation cannot himself be heard to complain of any
prejudice’. Holding that the appeal heard by the District Court in this present
case was fair and justified, the decision of the learned Judges that there were
no grounds for interference under Section 11 of the Suits Valuation Act,
1887, in this case, was viewed to be correct.

Mazhar Husain And Anr. v. Nidhi Lal (1885)

The pre-independence case of Mazhar Husain And Anr. vs Nidhi Lal (1885)
which was heard by the Allahabad High Court, had laid down the objectives
of Section 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The objectives which have
been observed are provided hereunder:

1. To avoid overburdening of the courts of higher grades with suits;

2. To afford the convenience of the parties and witnesses who may be
examined in such suits.

Tara Devi v. Sri Thakur Radha Krishna Maharaj

(1987)
In the case of Tara Devi v. Sri Thakur Radha Krishna Maharaj (1987),
Defendant had submitted a written statement in which he lodged a
preliminary objection, claiming that Plaintiff had devalued the suit and
questioning the Court’s authority to hear the case. The Trial Court
determined that the litigation was regulated by Section 7(IV)(c) of the Court
Fees Act, 1870 and that the Plaintiff had correctly assessed the lessee’s
leasehold interest. The Trial Court had observed that Plaintiff had the Right
to Place his own value on the relief sought. The valuation was neither
arbitrary nor unreasonable, and as a result, it was determined that Plaintiff
had correctly assessed the claim and that the required court fee had been
paid.

The Supreme Court of India while deciding the case had upheld the Trial
Court’s decision and had observed that when there is an objective criterion of
valuation, putting a value on the relief while ignoring those criteria may be
demonstrably arbitrary and irrational, and the Court will be justified in
interfering.
Territorial jurisdiction
In order to discuss territorial jurisdiction of a court, the four types of suits
that are to be considered are:

1. Suits in respect of the immovable property (Sections 16-18);

2. Suits in respect of the movable property (Section 19);
3. Suits in respect of compensation for wrongs (Section 19);
4. Other suits (Section 20).
Section 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 provides the provision for
suits of immovable property located within the jurisdiction of different courts.
The provision provides that suits can be filed in different courts within the
local limits of whose jurisdiction any portion of the property lies, provided
that suit is within pecuniary jurisdiction of such courts. Further, Section 18 of
the Code lays down the provision for place of institution of the suit where
local limits of the jurisdiction of Courts are uncertain.

Hakam Singh v. Gammon (India) Ltd. (1971)

The issue before the Supreme Court of India while deciding the case
of Hakam Singh v. Gammon (India) Ltd. (1971) was when two or more
courts have jurisdiction to entertain a suit, then how shall the trial of the suit
proceed. Defendant, a firm incorporated under the Indian Companies Act,
2013 with its major place of business in Bombay, entered into a contract with
Plaintiff that allowed for arbitration of dispute and indicated that
disagreements would be resolved solely in Bombay courts. Plaintiff had
objected to such restriction on the ground that the same is against public
policy.

The observations made by the Apex Court have been listed hereunder:

1. By virtue of Section 41 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 the Code of Civil

Procedure, 1908 applies to actions under the same in its entirety.
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 governs the courts’ authority to
consider an arbitration procedure for the purpose of submitting an
award under the Arbitration Act, 1940. The Respondent company,
which had its major place of business in Bombay, was liable to be
sued in Bombay under the terms of Section 20(a) of the Code of
Civil Procedure read with Explanation. 11.
2. It would not be permissible for the parties to confer jurisdiction on
any court by agreement if the same has not been conferred by the
Code. However, if two courts have jurisdiction to try a suit under the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 an agreement between the parties
 that the disagreement between them be handled in one of those
courts would not be adverse to public policy.
3. The agreement between the parties that the courts in Bombay alone
shall have authority to try the proceedings pertaining to the
arbitration was binding between them since the courts in Bombay
possessed jurisdiction under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in
this matter.

M/s. Exl Careers and Another v. Frankfinn Aviation

Services Private Limited (2020)
The Supreme Court of India while deciding the case of M/s. Exl Careers and
Another v. Frankfinn Aviation Services Private Limited (2020) interpreted the
language of Order VII Rule 10-A in contrast to the language of Section
24(2) and Section 25(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The Apex
Court observed that the discretion vested in the Court by Sections 24(2) and
25(3) to retry the proceedings or proceed from the point at which such
proceeding was transferred or withdrawn, in contrast to the scheme under
Order VII Rule 10 read with Rule 10-A, where no such discretion is given and
the proceeding must begin from the beginning.

Subject-matter jurisdiction
Subject-matter jurisdiction denotes the court’s authority or capacity to decide
on problems based on their nature. Different courts have been given the
authority to decide on various forms of lawsuits, taking into account the
multiplicity of situations. Suits involving insolvency, probate, divorce, and
other similar matters, for example, cannot be decided by a court of civil
judge of the junior division. If a court lacks jurisdiction over the subject
matter of action, the decree or judgment issued by the court is null and void.
The five kinds of suits where Section 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
can be invoked are as follows:

1. Partition of immovable property

2. Recovery of immovable property
3. Torts to immovable property
4. Determination of any right or interest in the property
5. Sale, Foreclosure, Redemption with respect to mortgage or charge
upon the immovable property
The Supreme Court had decided in Harshad Chiman Lal Modi vs. DLF
Universal Ltd. (2005) that an action can be filed under Section 16 of the CPC,
1908 where the immovable property is located, which in this case was in
Gurgaon (Haryana). As a result, the Delhi High Court lacks jurisdiction to
hear the case. In such cases, factors such as the location where the cause of
action arose or the residence of either party are irrelevant.

Objection to jurisdiction : Section 21 of CPC, 1908

The purpose of Section 21 is to safeguard honest litigants and to prevent
harassment of plaintiffs who have commenced actions in good faith before a
court that is later determined to lack jurisdiction. This clause cannot be used
by dishonest litigants.

The objection as to territorial jurisdiction

The Supreme Court of India while deciding the case of Seth Hiralal Patni vs
Sri Kali Nath (1962) took into account a suit filed by the Respondent against
the Appellant for the recovery of his commission in connection with certain
share transactions in Agra. The plaint was filed after the Bombay High Court
granted permission under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. One of the
Appellant’s defences, as stated in his written statement, was that the
complaint was filed beyond the Bombay High Court Original Side’s territorial
jurisdiction, because the whole cause of action, if any, arose in Agra.

The suit was eventually referred to arbitration. The arbitrator gave his award
in favor of the Respondent which was upheld on appeal by the High Court.
The Respondent had further filed an execution proceeding, to which the
Appellant objected that the Bombay High Court lacked jurisdiction to
entertain the suit and make the award a court decree because no part of the
cause of action ever arose within that court’s territorial jurisdiction and that
all subsequent proceedings were whole without jurisdiction.

The Apex Court held that when a party to a lawsuit agrees to submit the case
to arbitration through the court system, they are believed to have waived
their objection to the court’s territorial jurisdiction, which they made in their
written declaration. It went ahead to observe that the question of the
procedure’s validity, or the ruling giving permission under Clause 12 of the
Letters Patent, or the waiver of any objection, shall be submitted in the High
Court proceedings and not in the execution procedures. The decree’s
legitimacy may only be contested in execution proceedings if the court that
issued it lacked inherent jurisdiction over the suit’s subject matter or the
parties involved. Thus, it was held that the objection as to such jurisdiction
fell within Section 21 of the Code of 1908.

Objection as to pecuniary jurisdiction:

For an objection as to pecuniary jurisdiction to be raised, the three conditions
provided hereunder must be satisfied:
 1. The objection was taken by the court of the first instance;
2. There has been a consequent failure of justice;
3. The case was taken up at the earliest possible opportunity.
In this regard, the case of Kiran Singh v. Chaman Paswan (1954) can be
referred to.

The objection as to subject-matter jurisdiction

In the case of Hriday Nath Roy v. Ram Chandra Barna Sarma (1920), the
Calcutta High Court observed that a court’s subject-matter jurisdiction is
viewed as a condition precedent or sine qua non to the acquisition of
authority over the parties and the case, and if the court lacks jurisdiction,
any judgment, order, or decree issued is null and void.

Hierarchy of courts:
1. Supreme court
2. High court
3. District court
4. Senior civil judge court
5. Junior civil judge court

Pecuniary valuation is done to know which court the case will

be filed at.