Introduction
Section 19 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 deals with the place of suing in suits for compensation for wrongs to the person or to movable property.
The provision applies where a person seeks compensation for a wrong committed against:
- his or her person, or
- movable property.
Section 19 provides the plaintiff with an alternative choice of forum based on either:
- the place where the wrong was committed; or
- the place where the defendant resides, carries on business, or personally works for gain.
In simple terms:
For a wrong to a person or movable property, the suit may generally be filed either where the wrong occurred or where the defendant resides/carries on business/works for gain.
Statutory Provision
Section 19 CPC — Suits for compensation for wrongs to person or movables:
“Where a suit is for compensation for wrong to person or 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.”
The provision further deals with cases where the wrong is committed within the jurisdiction of one court while the defendant is situated within the jurisdiction of another court.
Meaning of Section 19
Section 19 creates a special rule of territorial jurisdiction for certain claims for compensation.
Unlike suits directly concerning immovable property under Section 16, Section 19 recognises two important connecting factors:
1. Place where the wrong occurred
The plaintiff may sue in the court within whose jurisdiction the wrongful act occurred.
2. Place where the defendant is located
The plaintiff may alternatively sue where the defendant:
- resides;
- carries on business; or
- personally works for gain.
Thus, Section 19 gives the plaintiff a degree of choice of forum.
Object of Section 19
The main objectives of Section 19 are:
- to provide a convenient forum for claims involving personal or movable-property wrongs;
- to allow the plaintiff to sue where the wrongful act occurred;
- to allow the plaintiff to sue where the defendant is located;
- to avoid unnecessary hardship in pursuing compensation claims;
- to provide a clear territorial rule for tortious or similar wrongs.
Essential Requirements
For Section 19 to apply, the suit must satisfy the following requirements:
1. The suit must be for compensation
The primary relief must be compensation for a wrong.
2. The wrong must concern the person or movable property
The provision applies to:
- wrongs to the person; or
- wrongs to movable property.
3. The wrong must have occurred within the jurisdiction of a court
The wrongful act must have a territorial connection with a particular court.
4. The defendant must have the required connection with another court
The defendant may:
- reside there;
- carry on business there; or
- personally work for gain there.
Example — Wrong to Person
A is assaulted by B in Chennai.
B resides in Bengaluru.
A files a suit seeking compensation for the wrong.
Under Section 19, A may have the option of instituting the suit:
- in Chennai, where the wrong occurred; or
- in Bengaluru, where B resides.
Example — Wrong to Movable Property
A’s movable property is wrongfully damaged by B in Delhi.
B carries on business in Jaipur.
A seeks compensation for the damage.
The suit may ordinarily be instituted:
- in Delhi, where the wrong occurred; or
- in Jaipur, where B carries on business.
“Wrong to Person”
The expression “wrong to person” covers wrongful acts affecting a person’s body, personal rights or interests in circumstances recognised by law.
Examples may include:
- assault;
- certain forms of personal injury;
- other civil wrongs causing injury to the person.
The precise applicability depends upon the nature of the cause of action and the relief claimed.
“Wrong to Movable Property”
The provision also applies to wrongs involving movable property.
Examples may include:
- wrongful taking;
- wrongful detention;
- damage to movable property;
- other actionable wrongs affecting movable property.
Again, the exact cause of action must be determined from the facts of the case.
Plaintiff’s Choice of Forum
One of the most important features of Section 19 is the expression:
“at the option of the plaintiff”
This means that where the statutory conditions are satisfied, the plaintiff can choose between the available courts.
The plaintiff is not necessarily restricted to the court where the defendant resides.
The plaintiff can also rely upon the place where the wrong occurred.
Easy Formula
Remember:
WRONG TO PERSON/MOVABLE → WHERE WRONG OCCURRED OR WHERE DEFENDANT IS LOCATED
Defendant’s Connection with the Court
Section 19 refers specifically to three forms of connection:
1. Residence
The defendant resides within the territorial jurisdiction of the court.
2. Carries on business
The defendant carries on business within that jurisdiction.
3. Personally works for gain
The defendant personally works for gain within that jurisdiction.
These expressions are important because they determine the alternative forum available to the plaintiff.
Section 19 and Section 20
Sections 19 and 20 both concern territorial jurisdiction, but they operate differently.
Section 19
Deals specifically with:
Compensation for wrongs to person or movable property.
Section 20
Deals with:
Other suits where jurisdiction may arise from the defendant’s residence/business or the place where the cause of action arises.
Therefore, Section 19 is a specific provision for a particular category of compensation claims.
Section 19 vs Section 20
| Section 19 | Section 20 |
|---|---|
| Wrongs to person or movable property | Other suits |
| Compensation is central | General rule |
| Specific territorial alternatives | General territorial alternatives |
| Place of wrong is important | Cause of action is important |
| Plaintiff has statutory choice | Jurisdiction depends on Section 20 conditions |
Section 19 and Section 16
The distinction between Sections 16 and 19 is important.
Section 16
Deals primarily with suits relating to immovable property.
The general rule is:
Where the property is situated.
Section 19
Deals with compensation for wrongs to:
- person; or
- movable property.
The plaintiff may generally choose between the place of wrong and the defendant’s relevant jurisdiction.
| Section | Subject |
|---|---|
| Section 16 | Immovable property |
| Section 19 | Wrongs to person or movable property |
Section 19 and Section 17
Section 17 deals with immovable property situated within the jurisdiction of different courts.
Section 19 does not concern that situation.
The basic distinction is:
Section 17 → Immovable property in different jurisdictions
Section 19 → Compensation for wrong to person or movable property
Nature of Section 19
Section 19 is essentially a territorial jurisdiction provision.
It does not determine whether the plaintiff is actually entitled to compensation.
The plaintiff must independently establish:
- the existence of the wrongful act;
- the defendant’s liability; and
- the resulting entitlement to compensation.
Section 19 only helps determine where the suit may be instituted.
Cause of Action Under Section 19
The place where the wrong was committed is an important territorial connecting factor.
Where the wrongful act occurred within the jurisdiction of a particular court, that court may ordinarily entertain the compensation suit, subject to the other legal requirements.
The plaintiff therefore need not necessarily travel to the defendant’s place of residence or business.
Example — Defendant in Another State
A suffers a wrongful injury in Mumbai.
The defendant resides in Hyderabad.
The plaintiff may ordinarily institute the compensation suit:
- in Mumbai, where the wrong occurred; or
- in Hyderabad, where the defendant resides.
This illustrates the alternative forum created by Section 19.
Example — Defendant Carries on Business
A’s movable property is damaged in Pune by B.
B does not reside in Pune but carries on business in Ahmedabad.
The plaintiff may have the option of instituting the suit:
- in Pune, where the wrong occurred; or
- in Ahmedabad, where B carries on business.
Important Limitation
Section 19 does not provide an unrestricted choice of any court.
The selected court must have a statutory territorial connection with:
- the place where the wrong occurred; or
- the defendant’s residence, business, or personal work for gain.
Thus:
Convenience alone does not create jurisdiction.
“Personally Works for Gain”
The phrase “personally works for gain” is significant.
It refers to a situation where the defendant personally works for gain within the territorial jurisdiction of the court.
The provision therefore recognises not only residence and business but also the defendant’s personal place of work.
Compensation Is Central
The wording of Section 19 begins with:
“Where a suit is for compensation for wrong…”
Therefore, the nature of the relief is important.
A suit must fall within the statutory category of compensation for a wrong to the person or movable property.
The court will examine the substance of the claim rather than merely the label given to the suit.
Common Confusions
Can a suit under Section 19 always be filed where the plaintiff resides?
No.
The plaintiff’s residence by itself does not create jurisdiction under Section 19.
Can the plaintiff file the suit anywhere the defendant has a branch?
Not automatically.
The statutory requirements concerning the defendant’s residence, business, or personal work for gain must be satisfied.
Does Section 19 apply to immovable property?
Generally, no. Suits directly concerning immovable property are primarily governed by Sections 16–18.
Does Section 19 give the plaintiff a choice?
Yes, where the statutory conditions are satisfied.
Does Section 19 establish liability?
No.
It only determines an appropriate territorial forum.
Is the place where the wrong occurred important?
Yes.
It is one of the principal connecting factors under Section 19.
Examination Point
A frequently asked question is:
“What is the rule regarding territorial jurisdiction under Section 19 CPC?”
A concise answer is:
Section 19 CPC applies to suits for compensation for wrongs to the person or movable property. Where 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 may, at their option, institute the suit in either court.
Easy Formula
COMPENSATION + PERSON/MOVABLE
↓
WHERE WRONG OCCURRED
OR
WHERE DEFENDANT RESIDES / DOES BUSINESS / PERSONALLY WORKS FOR GAIN
↓
PLAINTIFF’S CHOICE
Section 19 — Key Elements
| Element | Rule |
|---|---|
| Subject | Compensation for wrong |
| Wrong | Person or movable property |
| First forum | Where wrong occurred |
| Alternative forum | Defendant’s residence/business/work |
| Choice | Plaintiff’s option |
| Nature | Territorial jurisdiction |
| Related provision | Section 20 CPC |
Important Questions to Prepare
- What is the object of Section 19 CPC?
- What types of suits are covered by Section 19?
- Explain the expression “wrong to person.”
- Explain the expression “wrong to movable property.”
- What is meant by “at the option of the plaintiff”?
- Can a suit under Section 19 be filed where the defendant resides?
- Can it be filed where the defendant carries on business?
- What is meant by “personally works for gain”?
- Distinguish Section 19 from Section 16 CPC.
- Distinguish Section 19 from Section 20 CPC.
- Does Section 19 determine liability for compensation?
- Explain the territorial jurisdiction rule under Section 19 with examples.
Key Legal Principles
1. Special rule for compensation claims
Section 19 specifically applies to compensation for wrongs to the person or movable property.
2. Place of wrong is a jurisdictional basis
The court where the wrong occurred may entertain the suit.
3. Defendant’s location is another basis
The plaintiff may alternatively sue where the defendant resides, carries on business, or personally works for gain.
4. Plaintiff has an option
Where both statutory forums are available, the plaintiff can choose between them.
5. Section 19 is procedural
It determines the place of suing and does not itself establish the defendant’s liability.
Key Takeaways
| Concept | Principle |
|---|---|
| Provision | Section 19 CPC |
| Subject | Compensation for wrongs to person or movables |
| Main territorial factor | Place where wrong occurred |
| Alternative factor | Defendant’s residence/business/work |
| Choice | Plaintiff’s option |
| Nature | Territorial jurisdiction |
| Related provision | Section 20 CPC |
| Core principle | Wrong occurred or defendant’s jurisdiction |
ALSO READ: Section 18 – Uncertain Local Limits of Jurisdiction
Conclusion
Section 19 CPC provides a special rule concerning the place of suing in compensation claims arising from wrongs to the person or movable property.
Where the wrongful act occurs 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 of instituting the suit in either court.
The provision therefore provides flexibility while maintaining a genuine territorial connection between the dispute and the chosen court.
The central principle is:
For compensation for a wrong to the person or movable property, the plaintiff may generally sue where the wrong occurred or where the defendant resides, carries on business, or personally works for gain.
The easiest way to remember Section 19 is:
WRONG TO PERSON/MOVABLE → PLACE OF WRONG OR DEFENDANT’S JURISDICTION → PLAINTIFF’S OPTION.
