Introduction
Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 deals with the place of suing in cases not covered by Sections 15 to 19.
It is commonly described as the provision relating to “other suits.”
Section 20 provides territorial jurisdiction based primarily on:
- the residence or business of the defendant; or
- the place where the cause of action, wholly or partly, arises.
In simple terms:
A suit may generally be filed where the defendant is connected with the jurisdiction or where the cause of action arises, wholly or partly.
Statutory Provision
Section 20 CPC — Other suits to be instituted where defendants reside or cause of action arises:
Subject to the limitations aforesaid, every suit shall be instituted in a Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction—
(a) the defendant, or each of the defendants where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of the suit, actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain; or
(b) any of the defendants, where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of the suit, actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain, provided that in such case either the leave of the Court is given, or the defendants who do not reside, or carry on business, or personally work for gain, as aforesaid acquiesce in such institution; or
(c) the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises.
Explanation
A corporation shall be deemed to carry on business at its sole or principal office in India or, in respect of any cause of action arising at any place where it has also a subordinate office, at such place.
Meaning of Section 20
Section 20 is a general provision governing the place of suing where the suit does not fall within the specific categories dealt with by Sections 16 to 19.
It provides three principal bases of territorial jurisdiction:
Section 20(a)
Jurisdiction based on the defendant’s:
- residence;
- business; or
- personal work for gain.
Section 20(b)
Where there are multiple defendants, jurisdiction may be based on the residence, business or work of any one defendant, subject to:
- leave of the court; or
- acquiescence of the other defendants.
Section 20(c)
Jurisdiction exists where the cause of action wholly or partly arises.
Object of Section 20
The main objectives of Section 20 are:
- to provide a general rule for territorial jurisdiction;
- to ensure that defendants are ordinarily sued in a jurisdiction with which they have a connection;
- to allow litigation where the cause of action arises;
- to prevent arbitrary selection of courts;
- to provide flexibility where the cause of action occurs in a jurisdiction different from the defendant’s residence.
Section 20 therefore balances the interests of the plaintiff and defendant.
Section 20(a) — Defendant’s Residence, Business or Work
Section 20(a) provides jurisdiction where the defendant:
- actually and voluntarily resides;
- carries on business; or
- personally works for gain.
The relevant time is:
At the time of commencement of the suit.
Example
A resides in Delhi and B wants to sue A in a matter governed by Section 20.
Subject to the other requirements of law, the suit may be instituted in a competent court in Delhi because A actually and voluntarily resides there.
“Actually and Voluntarily Resides”
The residence contemplated by Section 20(a) is the defendant’s actual and voluntary residence.
The provision therefore requires a genuine connection with the territorial jurisdiction.
Temporary or artificial circumstances cannot automatically be treated as establishing jurisdiction.
The question of residence depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case.
“Carries on Business”
A defendant may also be sued in a court within whose territorial jurisdiction the defendant carries on business.
This is particularly relevant for:
- companies;
- firms;
- commercial entities; and
- individuals engaged in business.
The business connection must satisfy the requirements of Section 20.
“Personally Works for Gain”
The third basis under Section 20(a) is where the defendant:
personally works for gain
within the jurisdiction.
This is distinct from carrying on business.
The provision recognises the defendant’s personal place of work as a territorial connecting factor.
Section 20(b) — Multiple Defendants
Section 20(b) deals with cases where there are two or more defendants.
A suit may be instituted where any one of the defendants:
- resides;
- carries on business; or
- personally works for gain.
However, two conditions are important.
The court must either:
- grant leave, or
- the defendants who do not reside, carry on business, or personally work for gain in that jurisdiction must acquiesce in the institution of the suit.
Example
A wants to sue B, C and D.
- B resides in Chennai.
- C resides in Delhi.
- D resides in Mumbai.
If A wants to institute the suit in Chennai based on B’s residence, Section 20(b) requires the statutory condition concerning leave of the court or acquiescence of the other defendants to be satisfied.
Why Section 20(b) Requires Leave or Acquiescence
The provision prevents the plaintiff from arbitrarily choosing the residence of one defendant to drag all other defendants into an unrelated jurisdiction.
The requirement of leave or acquiescence protects defendants who have no ordinary territorial connection with the chosen court.
Thus:
One defendant’s residence can provide a forum for multiple defendants, but the statutory safeguard must be satisfied.
Section 20(c) — Cause of Action
Section 20(c) is one of the most important parts of the provision.
A suit may be instituted where:
“the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises.”
Therefore, the entire cause of action does not necessarily have to arise within the jurisdiction.
Even if a material part of the cause of action arises within the jurisdiction, the court may have territorial jurisdiction, subject to the other requirements of law.
Meaning of Cause of Action
Cause of action means the bundle of essential facts which the plaintiff must prove in order to obtain the relief claimed.
It is not merely:
- the evidence required to prove the case; or
- every fact mentioned in the plaint.
The relevant question is:
Which essential facts give the plaintiff the right to seek the relief?
Example — Cause of Action Wholly Arises
A enters into a contract with B in Jaipur.
The essential events giving rise to the dispute occur in Jaipur.
A may institute the appropriate suit in a competent court having territorial jurisdiction over Jaipur, provided Section 20 applies.
Example — Cause of Action Partly Arises
Suppose:
- the contract was entered into in Delhi;
- payment was required to be made in Mumbai; and
- the defendant failed to make the payment.
If the failure or another material part of the cause of action arises within Mumbai, Mumbai may have territorial jurisdiction under Section 20(c).
Thus:
Cause of action need not arise entirely in one place.
“Wholly or in Part”
The words “wholly or in part” are extremely important.
They mean that jurisdiction may arise where:
- the entire cause of action arises; or
- a legally material part of the cause of action arises.
However, a trivial or irrelevant fact occurring within a jurisdiction does not automatically confer jurisdiction.
Material Part of Cause of Action
The part of the cause of action relied upon must be material to the plaintiff’s claim.
For example, merely receiving correspondence at a particular place may not necessarily confer jurisdiction if that fact is not an essential part of the cause of action.
The court examines the substance of the dispute.
Section 20 and Choice of Forum
Section 20 may provide the plaintiff with more than one possible forum.
For example:
- Defendant resides in Delhi; and
- a material part of the cause of action arises in Mumbai.
Subject to the applicable rules, the plaintiff may have a choice between the competent courts in Delhi and Mumbai.
This is commonly referred to as the plaintiff’s choice of forum.
However:
Choice of forum is not the same as unrestricted forum shopping.
There must be a statutory basis for territorial jurisdiction.
Section 20 Explanation — Corporations
The Explanation to Section 20 contains an important rule regarding corporations.
A corporation is deemed to carry on business at:
- its sole office in India; or
- its principal office in India.
Additionally, where the cause of action arises at a place where the corporation has a subordinate office, the corporation is deemed to carry on business at that place in respect of that cause of action.
This is an important rule for determining territorial jurisdiction in suits involving companies.
Corporation — Principal Office and Subordinate Office
The Explanation can be understood through two situations.
Situation 1 — Principal Office
A corporation is deemed to carry on business at its sole or principal office in India.
Situation 2 — Subordinate Office
If:
- the corporation has a subordinate office at a particular place; and
- the cause of action arises at that place,
the corporation may also be treated as carrying on business there for that cause of action.
Important Case Law
ABC Laminart Pvt. Ltd. v. A.P. Agencies, Salem
Citation: (1989) 2 SCC 163
The Supreme Court explained important principles concerning cause of action and territorial jurisdiction under Section 20.
The Court recognised that where a part of the cause of action arises within a particular jurisdiction, that court may have territorial jurisdiction.
The case is a leading authority on understanding the expression “cause of action” in the context of territorial jurisdiction.
A.B.C. Laminart and Its Importance
The case is particularly important for understanding that:
A court may have jurisdiction where a material part of the cause of action arises.
However, the existence of jurisdiction depends upon the facts establishing a real connection with the cause of action.
Patel Roadways Ltd. v. Prasad Trading Co.
Citation: (1991) 4 SCC 270
The Supreme Court considered the application of the Explanation to Section 20 concerning corporations and subordinate offices.
The judgment is particularly important for understanding when a corporation can be treated as carrying on business at the location of a subordinate office.
The Court emphasised the relationship between the cause of action and the subordinate office.
New Moga Transport Co. v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Citation: (2004) 4 SCC 677
The Supreme Court examined questions concerning territorial jurisdiction and the operation of Section 20 in the context of corporations and their offices.
The decision is useful for understanding the limits of relying upon the mere existence of a corporate office to establish jurisdiction.
Section 20 and Cause of Action — Key Principle
The most important rule to remember is:
A court has territorial jurisdiction under Section 20(c) when the cause of action wholly or in part arises within its jurisdiction.
But the part of the cause of action must be legally significant.
Section 20 vs Section 19
This distinction is important.
Section 19
Deals specifically with:
Compensation for wrongs to person or movable property.
Section 20
Deals with:
Other suits.
Section 19 provides a specific rule for a particular category of compensation claims, while Section 20 functions as the general provision for other suits.
| Section 19 | Section 20 |
|---|---|
| Wrongs to person/movables | Other suits |
| Compensation | General category |
| Specific rule | General rule |
| Place of wrong or defendant’s jurisdiction | Defendant’s jurisdiction or cause of action |
Section 20 vs Section 16
Section 16
Primarily concerns suits relating to immovable property.
Section 20
Deals with other suits, subject to the earlier provisions.
Therefore, where a suit is specifically governed by Section 16, the general rule under Section 20 cannot ordinarily be used to bypass the special rule governing immovable property.
Section 20 vs Section 17
Section 17
Applies when immovable property is situated within the jurisdiction of different courts.
Section 20
Deals with other suits based on defendant-related connections or cause of action.
Section 20 and Section 15
Section 15 answers:
Which grade of court should be approached?
Section 20 answers:
Which territorial court can entertain the suit?
Therefore, both provisions may have to be considered together.
Section 20 and Forum Shopping
Section 20 can sometimes give the plaintiff multiple possible forums.
However, the plaintiff cannot create jurisdiction artificially.
The court must determine whether the statutory territorial connection actually exists.
A plaintiff cannot rely on:
- an insignificant event;
- an irrelevant transaction;
- a trivial communication; or
- an artificial arrangement
to manufacture jurisdiction.
Example — Contract Dispute
A company has its principal office in Delhi.
A contract is performed partly in Mumbai.
Payment is required to be made in Mumbai.
A dispute arises concerning non-payment.
Depending upon the contractual terms and facts, Mumbai may have jurisdiction because a material part of the cause of action arose there.
Delhi may also have jurisdiction where the defendant’s relevant residence or business connection satisfies Section 20.
Thus, more than one court may potentially have territorial jurisdiction.
Example — Multiple Defendants
A sues B and C.
- B resides in Kolkata.
- C resides in Chennai.
- Part of the cause of action arises in Kolkata.
A may seek to institute the suit in Kolkata under the applicable provisions.
Where jurisdiction is being founded on B’s residence under Section 20(b), the statutory requirement of leave or acquiescence concerning the other defendants becomes relevant.
Section 20 and Cause of Action vs Evidence
A common mistake is to treat every place where evidence exists as a place where the cause of action arises.
That is incorrect.
The court distinguishes between:
Facts constituting the cause of action
and
Evidence used to prove those facts.
The location of evidence by itself does not necessarily create territorial jurisdiction.
Section 20 — Three Clauses
| Clause | Basis of Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| 20(a) | Defendant’s residence/business/work |
| 20(b) | Residence/business/work of any one of multiple defendants, subject to leave/acquiescence |
| 20(c) | Cause of action wholly or partly arises |
This is the easiest way to remember the entire provision.
Easy Formula
SECTION 20 = DEFENDANT OR CAUSE OF ACTION
More specifically:
20(a) → Defendant
20(b) → Any one Defendant + Leave/Acquiescence
20(c) → Cause of Action
Common Confusions
Can every suit be filed where the plaintiff resides?
No.
The plaintiff’s residence generally does not create jurisdiction under Section 20.
Can a suit be filed wherever the defendant has any connection?
No.
The connection must fall within the statutory requirements of Section 20.
Does every part of the cause of action have to arise within the jurisdiction?
No.
Section 20(c) expressly permits jurisdiction where the cause of action arises wholly or in part.
Is every event mentioned in the plaint part of the cause of action?
No.
Only essential facts constituting the cause of action are relevant.
Can a trivial fact create jurisdiction?
Generally, no.
The relevant part of the cause of action must be material.
Can multiple defendants always be sued where one defendant resides?
No.
Section 20(b) requires the court’s leave or acquiescence of the defendants who do not have the relevant territorial connection.
Does Section 20 apply to suits concerning immovable property?
It generally operates as the rule for other suits, while specific provisions such as Sections 16–18 govern suits falling within those categories.
Examination Point
A frequently asked question is:
“What are the grounds of territorial jurisdiction under Section 20 CPC?”
A concise answer is:
Section 20 CPC provides that, subject to the earlier provisions, a suit may be instituted where all defendants actually and voluntarily reside, carry on business or personally work for gain; where any one of several defendants does so, subject to leave of the court or acquiescence of the other defendants; or where the cause of action wholly or partly arises.
Another Important Question
“What is meant by cause of action under Section 20(c) CPC?”
A concise answer is:
Cause of action means the bundle of essential facts which the plaintiff must establish to obtain the relief claimed. Under Section 20(c), a court has territorial jurisdiction where the cause of action wholly or in a legally material part arises.
Key Legal Principles
1. Section 20 is a general territorial rule
It applies to other suits not governed by the special provisions preceding it.
2. Defendant’s connection can create jurisdiction
Residence, business or personal work for gain may provide territorial jurisdiction.
3. Cause of action can create jurisdiction
A suit may be filed where the cause of action wholly or partly arises.
4. Partial cause of action is sufficient
The entire cause of action need not arise within one jurisdiction.
5. The part must be material
A trivial or irrelevant fact does not ordinarily create jurisdiction.
6. Multiple defendants require safeguards
Where jurisdiction is based on one defendant’s location, leave or acquiescence is required under Section 20(b).
7. Corporations receive a special rule
The Explanation determines when a corporation is deemed to carry on business at its principal or subordinate office.
Important Questions to Prepare
- What is the object of Section 20 CPC?
- Explain Section 20(a).
- Explain Section 20(b).
- Explain Section 20(c).
- What is meant by “actually and voluntarily resides”?
- What is meant by “carries on business”?
- What is meant by “personally works for gain”?
- Explain the significance of “wholly or in part” in Section 20(c).
- What is meant by cause of action?
- Can a trivial part of the cause of action confer jurisdiction?
- Explain the rule relating to multiple defendants under Section 20(b).
- Explain the Explanation to Section 20 regarding corporations.
- Distinguish Section 19 from Section 20 CPC.
- Distinguish Section 16 from Section 20 CPC.
- Explain ABC Laminart Pvt. Ltd. v. A.P. Agencies.
- Explain Patel Roadways Ltd. v. Prasad Trading Co.
- Discuss the concept of territorial jurisdiction under Section 20.
Key Takeaways
| Concept | Principle |
|---|---|
| Provision | Section 20 CPC |
| Subject | Other suits |
| 20(a) | Defendant’s residence/business/work |
| 20(b) | Any one of multiple defendants + leave/acquiescence |
| 20(c) | Cause of action wholly or partly arises |
| Main jurisdiction | Territorial |
| Plaintiff’s residence | Generally not sufficient |
| Partial cause of action | Sufficient if legally material |
| Corporation | Special rule under Explanation |
| Important cases | ABC Laminart; Patel Roadways |
| Core principle | Defendant’s connection or cause of action |
ALSO READ: Section 19 – Suits for Compensation for Wrongs to Person or Movables
Conclusion
Section 20 CPC is the general provision governing the place of suing for other suits. It provides territorial jurisdiction primarily on two bases: the defendant’s connection with the jurisdiction and the place where the cause of action arises.
Under Section 20(a), jurisdiction may arise from the defendant’s residence, business or personal work for gain. Section 20(b) deals with multiple defendants and imposes the additional safeguard of court’s leave or acquiescence. Section 20(c) allows a suit to be instituted where the cause of action arises wholly or in part.
The central principle is:
A suit under Section 20 may be instituted where the defendant has the prescribed territorial connection or where the cause of action, wholly or partly, arises.
The easiest way to remember Section 20 is:
20(a) → DEFENDANT
20(b) → ONE OF MULTIPLE DEFENDANTS + LEAVE/ACQUIESCENCE
20(c) → CAUSE OF ACTION
