Jurisdiction of Courts under the Civil Procedure Code, 1908

Introduction

Jurisdiction refers to the authority of a court to hear and decide a case. The Civil Procedure Code (CPC), 1908, provides a detailed framework for determining the jurisdiction of civil courts in India. If a court lacks jurisdiction, its decisions are invalid and unenforceable.

Jurisdiction is mainly classified into different types, including subject matter, territorial, pecuniary, and original or appellate jurisdiction.

---

Types of Jurisdiction under CPC

1. Subject-Matter Jurisdiction

• It refers to the power of a court to hear cases of a particular category or subject matter.
• Some courts are specialized for specific types of cases, such as the Family Court, Commercial Courts, Tribunals, etc.
• If a court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, its decision will be void.

Case Law:

• Kiran Singh v. Chaman Paswan (1954) – The Supreme Court held that any order passed by a court lacking subject-matter jurisdiction is a nullity and cannot be enforced.

Example:

• A Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) cannot hear cases related to property disputes.
• A Consumer Court cannot hear a case related to company law disputes.

---

2. Territorial Jurisdiction (Section 16-20, CPC)

• It determines which court has jurisdiction based on geographical location.
• A case must be filed where the cause of action arises or where the defendant resides.
• Sections 16 to 20 of CPC lay down rules for territorial jurisdiction.

Key Provisions:

• Section 16: Suits related to immovable property must be filed where the property is located.
• Section 17: If a property is located in multiple jurisdictions, the case can be filed in any one of them.
• Section 18: If jurisdiction is unclear, the court where the suit is first filed will decide.
• Section 19: Defamation, wrongful detention, or personal injuries suits can be filed where the wrong was committed or where the defendant resides.
• Section 20: If no specific provision applies, the case can be filed where the defendant resides or carries on business.

Case Law:

• Harshad Chiman Lal Modi v. DLF Universal Ltd. (2005) – The Supreme Court held that a suit related to immovable property must be filed in the court within whose jurisdiction the property is situated.

Example:

• If a property in Delhi is in dispute, the suit must be filed in a Delhi court.
• If a contract was breached in Mumbai, the case must be filed in Mumbai.

---

3. Pecuniary Jurisdiction

• It refers to the financial limits of a court in hearing cases.
• Courts have different limits based on the monetary value of the dispute.

Hierarchy of Pecuniary Jurisdiction in India

Court	Pecuniary Limit
District Court	₹5,00,000 and above
Civil Judge (Senior Division)	Above ₹1,00,000
Civil Judge (Junior Division)	Up to ₹1,00,000

Case Law:

• Kusum Ingots & Alloys Ltd. v. Union of India (2004) – The Supreme Court held that pecuniary jurisdiction is a crucial factor, and cases must be filed in the appropriate court.

Example:

• If a claim is for ₹10 lakh, it cannot be filed before a court with a pecuniary limit of ₹5 lakh.

---

4. Original & Appellate Jurisdiction

• Original jurisdiction allows a court to hear a case for the first time.
• Appellate jurisdiction allows a higher court to review the decision of a lower court.

Courts with Original Jurisdiction

• High Courts of Bombay, Calcutta, Madras, and Delhi have original jurisdiction for civil cases above a certain value.

Case Law:

• L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997) – The Supreme Court held that the High Court’s appellate jurisdiction cannot be curtailed.

---

5. Inherent Jurisdiction (Section 151, CPC)

• It allows a court to pass orders to prevent the abuse of process or ensure justice.
• Even if the CPC does not explicitly provide for a particular power, the court can exercise it in the interest of justice.

Case Law:

• Manohar Lal Chopra v. Rai Bahadur Rao Seth Hiralal (1962) – The Supreme Court held that inherent jurisdiction allows courts to issue temporary injunctions even when CPC does not expressly provide for it.

---

Exclusion of Jurisdiction of Civil Courts

Certain matters are outside the jurisdiction of civil courts due to constitutional or statutory restrictions.

1. Express Exclusion (Section 9, CPC)

• If a statute provides a special tribunal for certain disputes, civil courts do not have jurisdiction.

Case Law:

• State of A.P. v. Manjeti Laxmi Kantha Rao (2000) – The Supreme Court ruled that civil courts cannot interfere in matters specifically assigned to tribunals.

Example:

• Labour Disputes – The Industrial Disputes Act excludes civil courts from handling employment disputes.
• Tax Matters – Tax disputes must be heard by the appropriate tax tribunal.

2. Implied Exclusion

• Even if not explicitly excluded, if a specialized body is created to handle a specific type of case, civil courts cannot interfere.

Example:

• The Competition Commission of India (CCI) handles competition law disputes.

---

Objection to Jurisdiction

• If a party believes that the court lacks jurisdiction, they must raise an objection at the earliest stage.
• If the objection is not raised initially, it may be considered waived in certain cases.

Case Law:

• Hiralal Patni v. Kali Nath (1962) – The Supreme Court held that jurisdictional objections must be raised at the earliest stage of the trial.

---

Conclusion

Jurisdiction is the foundation of civil litigation. Filing a suit in the wrong court can lead to dismissal. Understanding subject-matter, territorial, pecuniary, and appellate jurisdiction is essential for lawyers and litigants to ensure that their case is heard in the appropriate forum. The CPC provides a structured approach to determine jurisdiction, ensuring that cases are adjudicated by the correct and competent court.