UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL

STUDIES, PU, CHD

JURISDICTION UNDER
CPC

SUBMITTED TO – DR. KARAN DHILLON

SUBMITTED BY –AMYIA MALHOTRA

CLASS – B.A.LL. B (HONS.)
SEMESTER– SEVENTH SEMESTER
ROLL NO. 385/20
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to my teacher Dr. Karan

Dhillon

who gave me the golden opportunity to do this wonderful project on the topic

“JURISDICTION UNDER CPC” which also helped me in doing a lot of research

and I came to know about so many new things. I am thankful to you.

Secondly, I would also like to thank my parents and friends who helped me a lot in

finishing this project within the time limit.

I am making this project not only for marks but also to increase my knowledge.

Thanks again to all who helped me.

Thank You.
INTRODUCTION

It is a well-known fact that jurisdiction is a key component in determining whether

the court has the power to adjudicate the case. Without a clear understanding of the
jurisdiction, one cannot proceed with a case. Unless and until it is determined that
the court has the power and authority to adjudicate the matter, the case cannot
move forward. Jurisdiction means the power or authority conferred by the law
upon the court, tribunal, or judge to decide or adjudicate any dispute between the
parties or pass judgment or order.

Meaning of Jurisdiction

It can be said that Jurisdiction is the limit of a judicial authority. It is the extent to
which a court may exercise its authority over suits, cases, appeals, etc. It has not
been defined in the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as “CPC”). It
was derived from two Latin words: juris and dicto. Jurisdiction determines the
competency of the court to try the matter. Often people attach a wrong meaning to
jurisdiction. They tend to have a false belief that a court’s jurisdiction can only be
determined by its geographical limits, but that’s not true. There are different kinds
of jurisdiction. Therefore, it would be incorrect to classify jurisdiction into only
one kind i.e., territorial jurisdiction.
Lack of jurisdiction and irregular exercise of jurisdiction
Whenever the suit is made before the court the initial issue is to decide whether the
court has jurisdiction to deal with the matter. If the court has all the three territorial,
pecuniary or subject matter jurisdiction then the court simply has the power to deal
with any of the cases. If the court does not have any jurisdiction, then it will be
recognized as lack of jurisdiction and irregular exercise of jurisdiction. When the
court does not have jurisdiction to decide the case then such decision will be
regarded as void or voidable depending upon the circumstances.

Kinds of Jurisdiction of Civil Courts

Original Jurisdiction

When the court has authority or power to try the matter, decide cases, suits, etc.,
that court in the first instance would be called its original jurisdiction.

Appellate Jurisdiction

Appellate Jurisdiction is referred to as the power or authority conferred upon a

superior court to re-adjudicate a case that has already been adjudicated by a lower
court before.
Foreign Jurisdiction

As per Section 2(a) of the Foreign Jurisdiction Act, 1947, Foreign jurisdiction is
defined as “any jurisdiction which by treaty, agreement, grant, usage, sufferance or
other lawful means the Central Government has for the time being in or in relation
to any area outside India.”

Exclusive Jurisdiction

This bestows power on only one court to decide a case. In the case of exclusive
jurisdiction, no other court would have the power to try those cases which are
being tried by courts having exclusive jurisdiction to try those cases.

Concurrent Jurisdiction

In case of concurrent jurisdiction, the party is free to approach any of the courts
that have shared such concurrent jurisdiction. Concurrent Jurisdiction is when
various courts have jurisdiction over the same case.

Territorial Jurisdiction

Territorial Jurisdiction is where the geographical boundaries and limits determine

the jurisdiction of civil courts. The geographical boundaries are clearly demarcated
in the case of such a jurisdiction. Section 16 to Section 20 of the CPC talks about
the Territorial jurisdiction civil courts.

Section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code

Section 9 of the CPC states that a court has the jurisdiction to try all suits of a
“civil nature” except suits on which their cognizance is either “expressly or
impliedly barred”. This implies that a civil court unless the suit is of a civil nature
and the cognizance of which is neither expressly nor impliedly barred, a civil court
may not have the jurisdiction to try it.
A suit of a civil nature may be one that is concerned with private rights and
obligations. For example, suits for dissolution of marriage, suit for rent, etc. It is
extremely important to note that although a suit in which the principal question
with respect to caste or religion is not a suit of a civil nature, but if the main
question in a suit is that of a civil nature and if the adjudication incidentally
involves the determination relating to a caste question or to rights relating to
religion, it will not cease to be suit of a civil nature and the jurisdiction of a civil
court is not barred.

In the case of Raja Ram Kumar v. Union of India, while referring to the
“impliedly barred” part of Section 9, the Supreme Court made an observation that
in a situation where a common law remedy exists and is recognized by the statute
and if a new statutory remedy is added that does not expressly bar the civil court’s
jurisdiction, then the common law remedy as well as statutory remedy might be
available.

Section 15: Place of Suing Based on Pecuniary Basis

Section 15 of Code of Civil Procedure 1908- “Court in which suits to be

instituted”- “Every suit shall be instituted in the Court of the lowest grade
competent to try it”

Section 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure states that every lawsuit should be
initiated in the Court of the lowest grade with the competence to handle it. This
requirement aims to prevent overburdening of higher courts. While a judgment
passed by a higher-grade court remains valid, a decree passed by an incompetent
court would be considered void.

Therefore, a higher court decree cannot be passed without jurisdiction, as clarified

by the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court in the case of Gopal v. Shamrao
(1941).

Section 15 serves two primary purposes:

 Reducing the workload of higher courts.

  Providing convenience to the parties and witnesses involved in such
lawsuits.
The jurisdiction of a court under Section 15 is determined based on the valuation
stated by the plaintiff in the lawsuit, rather than the final amount for which the
Court will pass the decree.

Section 16 to 20: Place of Suing Based on Territorial Aspects

When examining the territorial jurisdiction of a court, it is important to consider

the following four types of suits:

Suits related to immovable property: These are governed by Sections 16-18 of

the Code of Civil Procedure. These sections outline the rules and guidelines for
filing suits concerning disputes over immovable property.

Suits related to movable property: Section 19 of the Code of Civil Procedure

pertains to suits involving movable property. It lays down the provisions for filing
suits related to disputes over movable assets.

Suits related to compensation for wrongs: Section 19 of the Code of Civil

Procedure also covers suits concerning compensation for wrongs. This section
provides guidelines for filing suits seeking compensation for injuries or damage
caused by wrongful acts.

Other suits: Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure deals with suits that fall
outside the specific categories mentioned above. It encompasses suits that do not
fit into the scope of immovable property, movable property, or compensation for
wrongs.

Place of Suing for Matters Involving Immovable Property (Section

16-18)

Section 16

Section 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 states that suits related to specific
types of claims concerning immovable property should be instituted in the Court
within the local jurisdiction where the property is situated. These types of suits
include:

 Recovery of immovable property with or without rent or profits,

 Partition of immovable property,
 Foreclosure, sale, or redemption in the case of a mortgage or charge on
immovable property,
 Determination of any other right or interest in immovable property,
 Compensation for wrong to immovable property,
 Recovery of movable property that is currently under distraint or attachment.
However, there is a provision that if a suit seeks relief or compensation for wrong
to immovable property held by or on behalf of the defendant. The relief can be
entirely obtained through the defendant’s obedience, the suit can be filed either in
the Court within the jurisdiction where the property is situated or in the Court
within the jurisdiction where the defendant resides, carries on business, or works
for gain voluntarily and effectively.

Section 17 of the CPC

Section 17 of Code of Civil Procedure 1908 states, “Suits for immovable property
situate within the jurisdiction of different Courts”.

In cases where the immovable property is situated within the local jurisdiction of
different courts if a lawsuit is filed seeking compensation or relief for wrongs
caused to the immovable property, it can be brought before any court within the
jurisdiction where a portion of the property is located. However, it is important to
note that the Court hearing the case will have cognizance over the entire claim,
considering the significance of the subject matter of the suit.

Section 18

Section 18 of Code of Civil Procedure 1908 deals with “Place of institution of suit
where local limits of jurisdiction of Courts are uncertain”.

When there is uncertainty regarding the local jurisdiction of courts in relation to

immovable property, a court can record a statement and proceed with the case. The
decree issued by that Court will be effective as if the property was within its
jurisdiction. However, suppose no statement is recorded and an objection is raised
before a higher court. In that case, the objection will only be entertained if there is
no reasonable ground for uncertainty when filing the suit, resulting in a miscarriage
of justice.

In the case of Hakam Singh v. Gammon (India) Ltd. (1971), the Supreme Court
of India dealt with the issue of how the trial of a suit should proceed when multiple
courts have jurisdiction over it. The defendant, a firm incorporated under the
Indian Companies Act, had its main place of business in Bombay and had entered a
contract with the plaintiff that included a provision for arbitration and specified
that disputes would be resolved exclusively in Bombay courts. The plaintiff
objected to this restriction, arguing that it was against public policy.

Place of Suing in CPC for Matters Involving Immovable Property

(Section 19)

Section 19 of Code of Civil Procedure 1908 deals with “Suits for compensation for
wrongs to person or movables”.

In cases where a suit involves compensation for a wrong done to a person or

movable property, if the wrong occurred within the jurisdiction of one Court and
the defendant resides, carries on business, or personally works for gain within the
jurisdiction of another court, the plaintiff has the option to file the suit in either of
the mentioned courts.

For instance, if Raj, who resides in Kolkata, commits a wrongful act against Suraj,
who resides in Gujarat, Suraj can choose to file the lawsuit in either the Court in
Kolkata or the Court in Gujarat, but not in a third unrelated court like Delhi. This
provision allows the plaintiff to select the Court based on their convenience or
strategic considerations when the wrong and the defendant’s location fall under
different court jurisdictions.
Section 20: Place of Suing in CPC for Other Suits

Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure is a residuary section that addresses

situations where the cause of action arises from a breach of contract or business
transactions. According to this section, if there is a breach of contract or a cause of
action within the jurisdiction of one Court, or if the defendant voluntarily resides,
carries on business, or works for personal benefit within the jurisdiction of another
court, the plaintiff has the option to file the suit in either of those courts.

For example, let’s consider a scenario where Rohit, a clothing manufacturer, is

based in Sonipat, and Sonam, a clothing retailer, is based in Gandhinagar. Through
her agent, who resides in Bangalore, Sonam enters a transaction with Rohit. In
such a case, the suit can be filed either in Sonipat, where the cause of action
originated, or in Gandhinagar, where Sonam resi

Objections to Jurisdiction

Section 21 of the CPC provides that no objection as to the place of suing or the
pecuniary limits of its jurisdiction or the competence of the executing Court with
reference to the local limits of its jurisdiction, shall be allowed by Appellate or
Revisional Authorities unless objection of such nature was taken in the Court of
first instance at the earliest and unless there has been a consequent failure of
justice.
Conclusion
The jurisdiction of civil courts as given in the CPC is quite vast and therefore, it
becomes crucial to study those in detail. It is necessary to understand that unless a
suit is civil or is express or impliedly not barred by law, a civil court cannot try it.

Civil court has jurisdiction to investigate whether tribunal and quasi-judicial bodies
or legal executive acted within their jurisdiction. It can be presumed that section 9
essentially deals with the issue of the civil court’s jurisdiction to consider a matter.
Civil court has jurisdiction to consider a suit of civil nature except when its
notification is expressly barred or bared by significant suggestion. Civil court has
jurisdiction to resolve the problem of its jurisdiction.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

 https://lawbhoomi.com/place-of-suing-in-cpc/#:~:text=Section%2015%3A%20Place
%20of%20Suing%20Based%20on%20Pecuniary%20Basis,-Section
%2015%20of&text=Section%2015%20of%20the%20Code,prevent%20overburdening
%20of%20higher%20courts
 https://lawcorner.in/jurisdiction-of-civil-courts-in
india/#Section_9_of_the_Civil_Procedure_Code
 https://districts.ecourts.gov.in/sites/default/files/Jurisdiction%20of%20courts%20by
%20Sri%20K%20Srinivasa%20Rao.pdf
 “The Code of Civil Procedure”, by Dr. Avatar Singh, Central Law Publications