The Code of Civil Procedure 1908 has been enacted to regulate the procedure of Civil Courts in
the trail of Civil Cases. The Code of Civil Procedure which is an adjective law was enacted by
the Central Legislature in 1908 and came into force from 1st January 1909.When a person’s right recognized by a civil court is violated by another, the aggrieved person can approach a civil court by the way of a suit. The person who institutes the suit is known as plaintiff. The person against whom the suit is instituted is known as defendant. The foremost thing which is determined during the filing of a suit is the place of suing and Section 15 to 20 deals with the place of suing.
Pecuniary Jurisdiction (Section 15)
By Section 15 of the Code, every suit shall be instituted in the Court of the lowest grade
competent to try it. A Munsiff’s Court is competent to try a suit if the amount or value of
the subject matter doesn’t not exceed one lakh rupees. Subordinate Judge’s Court have
unlimited pecuniary jurisdiction. District Court also have unlimited pecuniary
jurisdiction. Thus a District Court and Subordinate Court are competent to try original
suits of which the value of the subject matter maybe any amount.
Territorial jurisdiction (Section 16)
The following suits are to be instituted in the court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the property situates under Section 16 :
- Suits for the recovery of immovable property with or without rent or profits.
- Suits for the partition of immovable property.
- Suits for foreclosure, sale or redemption in the case of a mortgage of immovable property or charge upon immovable property.
- Suits for determination of any other right to or interest in immovable property.
- Suits for compensation for wrong to immovable property.
- Suits for recovery of movable property actually under distrait or attachment.
If a suit to obtain in respect of immovable property can be entirely obtained through the personal obedience of the defendant, the suits may be instituted either within the local limits of the court where the property is situate or in the court within whose jurisdiction the defendant actually and voluntarily resides or carrier on business, or personally works for gain. Thus if the suit is one for compensation for the wrong done to the immovable property, it can be instituted in a court within whose jurisdiction (i) the property situate or (ii) the defendant resides or (iii) carries on business or (iv) personally works for gain.
Suits for immovable property situate within jurisdiction of different courts
Where the immoveable property is situated within the local jurisdiction of two or more different Courts, the suits may be instituted in any Court, within whose local jurisdiction, a portion of the property is situated, and Court is competent to adjudicate over entire suit property, not just portion situated in its jurisdiction. This provision is intended to prevent multiplicity of suit.
Place of institution of suit where local limits of jurisdiction of courts are uncertain
Section 18 provides that if it is uncertain as to within whose jurisdiction of two or more
courts ,the immovable property is situate any one of those courts may try the suit relating
to that property after recording a statement as to uncertainly.
Suits for Compensation for Wrongs to Person or Movables (Section 19)
Where a suit is for compensation for wrong done to the person or to movable property, if
the wrong was done within the local limits of the jurisdiction of one Court and the
defendant resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain, within the local
limits of the jurisdiction of another Court, the suit may be instituted at the option of the
plaintiff in either of the said Courts.
Other suits to be instituted where defendants reside or cause of action arises.
Section 20 enacts the rule as to the forum in cases of personal actions and has to be read
subject to the provisions of section 15 to 19 of the code. Every suit shall be instituted in
the court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction :
- the cause of action wholly or partly arises
- the defendant resides, caries on business or personal works for gain.
In Hakam Singh v. Gammon (India) Ltd (1971) 1 SCC 286, The Court held that if two or more courts have jurisdiction to try the suit, it is open to the parties to select a particular forum and exclude the other forums.
Therefore , Section 15 to 20 deals with place of suing with reference to the subject-matter, pecuniary value and the local limits which is mentioned in detail above. Each court has its own pecuniary jurisdiction and territorial jurisdiction. Hence the concept of the place of suing is very important as it helps to determine the jurisdiction of each court. It helps to the plaintiff where to file a suit and also saves the time of the court in determining the jurisdiction of the court.
I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.
If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at email@example.com
We also have a Facebook Group Restarter Moms for Mothers or Women who would like to rejoin their careers post a career break or women who are enterpreneurs.
We are also running a series Inspirational Women from January 2021 to March 31,2021, featuring around 1000 stories about Indian Women, who changed the world. #choosetochallenge