Section 9 CPC — Courts to Try All Civil Suits Unless Barred

Introduction

Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 lays down the fundamental rule governing the jurisdiction of civil courts. It provides that civil courts have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature unless the cognizance of such suits is expressly or impliedly barred.

The provision establishes a broad presumption in favour of civil court jurisdiction. A person who approaches a civil court is ordinarily entitled to have a civil dispute adjudicated by that court unless a law has excluded such jurisdiction either clearly or by necessary implication.

Section 9 is therefore one of the most important provisions for understanding the jurisdiction of civil courts. It is frequently invoked when a defendant argues that a civil suit is not maintainable because the dispute must be decided by a special tribunal, authority or statutory forum.

Section at a Glance

Particular	Details
Section	Section 9 CPC
Subject	Jurisdiction of civil courts
Nature	Jurisdictional
General rule	Civil courts have jurisdiction over suits of a civil nature
Exception	Jurisdiction is excluded expressly or impliedly
Important concepts	Civil nature, express bar, implied bar
Related provisions	Sections 10, 11, 16–21 and Order VII Rule 11(d)

Statutory Provision

Section 9 CPC provides:

“The Courts shall (subject to the provisions herein contained) have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred.”

The Section contains two Explanations.

Explanation I

A suit in which the right to property or to an office is contested remains a suit of a civil nature even where the determination of that right depends entirely upon questions concerning religious rites or ceremonies.

Explanation II

For the purposes of Section 9, it is immaterial whether any fees are attached to the office referred to in Explanation I or whether the office is attached to a particular place.

Meaning of Section 9 CPC

The basic principle can be stated simply:

Civil courts have jurisdiction to decide civil disputes unless that jurisdiction has been excluded by law.

The expression “civil nature” is deliberately wider than merely saying “civil suit”. The dispute must concern civil rights, obligations, property, status, office or other matters recognised by civil law.

At the same time, even a dispute of a civil nature may be outside the jurisdiction of a civil court if another law expressly or impliedly excludes the court’s jurisdiction.

Purpose and Object of Section 9

Section 9 protects the general jurisdiction of civil courts.

Its principal purposes are:

• to recognise civil courts as the ordinary forums for adjudication of civil rights;
• to ensure that exclusion of civil court jurisdiction is not readily presumed;
• to provide a general jurisdictional framework for civil litigation;
• to recognise the jurisdiction of specialised statutory forums where the legislature has validly excluded ordinary civil jurisdiction.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly treated civil court jurisdiction as broad and has emphasised that exclusion must be established rather than casually presumed.

Essential Requirements of Section 9

1. There must be a suit

Section 9 concerns the jurisdiction of courts to try suits.

2. The suit must be of a civil nature

The dispute must concern civil rights or obligations.

Examples include disputes relating to:

• property;
• contractual rights;
• money;
• possession;
• civil status;
• private rights;
• rights attached to an office.

3. There must be no statutory bar

Even where a dispute is civil in nature, the civil court cannot entertain it if its jurisdiction is excluded.

The exclusion may be:

• express, or
• implied.

4. The exclusion must be legally established

The mere existence of a special statute or alternative remedy does not automatically establish that civil court jurisdiction has been excluded.

The intention of the legislature must be examined from the statutory scheme.

What Is a Suit of Civil Nature?

The expression “civil nature” has a broad meaning.

A dispute is generally of a civil nature when it concerns the determination or enforcement of civil rights or obligations.

The Explanation to Section 9 specifically clarifies that a dispute does not cease to be civil merely because determining the civil right requires consideration of religious rites or ceremonies.

For example, if the right to hold a particular office is disputed, the suit remains one of a civil nature even if deciding that right requires the court to consider religious practices.

The key question is therefore the nature of the right being adjudicated, rather than merely the presence of religious questions in the dispute.

Express Bar of Civil Court Jurisdiction

An express bar exists where a statute clearly states that a civil court shall not have jurisdiction over a particular matter.

For example, a special statute may provide that an order of a particular statutory authority shall not be questioned before a civil court.

Where such language clearly excludes civil court jurisdiction, the statutory bar must be given effect.

The Supreme Court has recognised that where the statute contains an express exclusion, the statutory scheme and available remedies remain relevant, but the clear legislative exclusion cannot ordinarily be ignored.

Implied Bar of Civil Court Jurisdiction

An implied bar arises where the statute does not expressly prohibit a civil suit but its scheme necessarily indicates that the legislature intended to exclude civil court jurisdiction.

This requires careful examination of the statute.

The court may consider:

• the scheme of the legislation;
• the nature of the right created by the statute;
• the remedy provided by the statute;
• the jurisdiction and powers of the special tribunal or authority;
• whether the statutory remedy is intended to be final;
• whether the statute adequately provides the relief ordinarily available from a civil court.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that exclusion of civil court jurisdiction is not readily inferred.

Tests for Exclusion of Civil Court Jurisdiction

The leading authority on this subject is Dhulabhai v. State of Madhya Pradesh.

The Constitution Bench laid down principles for determining whether the jurisdiction of civil courts has been excluded.

Principle 1 — Finality of Special Tribunal’s Orders

Where a statute gives finality to the orders of a special tribunal, civil court jurisdiction may be excluded if the tribunal provides an adequate remedy for matters that a civil court would ordinarily decide.

However, the exclusion does not necessarily extend to cases where the statutory provisions have not been complied with or where the tribunal has not acted according to fundamental principles of judicial procedure.

Principle 2 — Express Bar

Where the statute expressly bars civil court jurisdiction, examination of the statutory scheme and adequacy of remedies may be relevant, but such considerations do not ordinarily override a clear statutory exclusion.

Principle 3 — No Express Bar

Where there is no express exclusion, the court must examine the statutory scheme and the remedies provided to determine whether civil court jurisdiction has been impliedly excluded.

Principle 4 — Special Right or Liability

If a statute creates a special right or liability and provides a special mechanism for determining that right or liability, the intention of the legislature to exclude ordinary civil jurisdiction may be inferred depending upon the structure of the statute.

Principle 5 — Statutory Remedy

The nature and adequacy of the remedy provided under the special statute are important factors in determining whether civil court jurisdiction has been excluded.

Principle 6 — Fundamental Judicial Procedure

Where a statutory authority has failed to comply with fundamental principles of judicial procedure, the availability of a statutory remedy does not necessarily exclude the jurisdiction of a civil court.

Principle 7 — Exclusion Is Not Readily Inferred

The jurisdiction of civil courts should not be treated as excluded unless the statutory conditions supporting such exclusion are established.

Important Case Laws on Section 9 CPC

Dhulabhai v. State of Madhya Pradesh

Citation: AIR 1969 SC 78

Principle: The Constitution Bench laid down the leading principles for determining when the jurisdiction of civil courts is excluded by a special statute.

Relevance to Section 9: This is the principal authority for understanding the distinction between express and implied exclusion of civil court jurisdiction. The decision establishes that exclusion cannot ordinarily be inferred merely because a special tribunal or statutory remedy exists.

Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd. v. Hong Kong & Shanghai Banking Corporation

Citation: (2009) 8 SCC 646

Principle: The Supreme Court considered the relationship between civil court jurisdiction and specialised statutory forums and discussed circumstances relevant to exclusion of civil court jurisdiction.

Relevance to Section 9: The case reinforces the importance of examining legislative intent and the nature of the alternative forum when deciding whether civil court jurisdiction has been excluded.

Most Rev. P.M.A. Metropolitan v. M.M. Marthoma

Citation: (1995) 1 SCC 286

Principle: The Supreme Court recognised the broad scope of civil court jurisdiction and explained that disputes concerning civil rights can fall within the jurisdiction of civil courts even when questions involving religion arise.

Relevance to Section 9: The decision helps explain the breadth of the expression “suit of a civil nature.”

Section 9 and Order VII Rule 11(d)

Section 9 is closely connected with Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC.

Order VII Rule 11(d) provides for rejection of a plaint where the suit appears from the statements in the plaint to be barred by any law.

Therefore, where the plaint itself establishes that the civil court has no jurisdiction because the suit is barred by law, the question may arise at the stage of considering rejection of the plaint.

However, the court must carefully examine whether the alleged statutory bar is actually established.

Section 9 and Special Tribunals

The existence of a special tribunal does not by itself mean that the civil court has no jurisdiction.

The court must determine:

1. whether the statute expressly excludes civil court jurisdiction;
2. if not, whether exclusion can be implied from the statutory scheme;
3. what rights and liabilities the statute creates;
4. what remedy the statute provides; and
5. whether the special forum has the power to grant relief of the nature sought.

This approach prevents an overly broad interpretation of statutory bars.

Section 9 and Religious Questions

Section 9 does not exclude civil court jurisdiction merely because religious questions arise in a dispute.

Explanation I specifically recognises that where the dispute concerns a right to property or an office, it remains a suit of a civil nature even if the determination depends entirely on religious rites or ceremonies.

Therefore, the presence of a religious issue does not automatically convert a civil dispute into a non-cognizable matter.

Practical Examples

Example 1 — Civil Property Dispute

A claims ownership of a house and B disputes A’s title.

The dispute concerns a civil right relating to property. It is therefore a suit of a civil nature and falls within the general jurisdiction of civil courts unless a valid statutory bar applies.

Example 2 — Express Statutory Bar

A special statute expressly provides that orders passed by a particular authority shall not be challenged before a civil court and provides a statutory appeal.

Where the conditions for the statutory bar are satisfied, the civil court may lack jurisdiction over a suit challenging that order.

Example 3 — Implied Bar

A statute creates a special right, establishes a specialised tribunal to determine that right, gives the tribunal final authority and provides an adequate remedy against its decisions.

Even without an express prohibition, the statutory scheme may indicate an implied exclusion of civil court jurisdiction.

Example 4 — Religious Question

A dispute concerns the right to hold a religious office, and determining the right requires consideration of religious rites.

Under Explanation I, the dispute remains one of a civil nature because the underlying dispute concerns the right to an office.

Common Confusions About Section 9

Civil Nature vs Civil Court Jurisdiction

These are not identical.

A suit may be of a civil nature but still be barred from the jurisdiction of a civil court by a valid statutory provision.

Therefore, the analysis has two stages:

First: Is the suit of a civil nature?

Second: Is the jurisdiction of the civil court expressly or impliedly barred?

Express Bar vs Implied Bar

An express bar is created by clear statutory language.

An implied bar is inferred from the statutory scheme and legislative intention.

The latter requires greater caution because exclusion of civil court jurisdiction is not readily inferred.

Alternative Remedy vs Bar of Jurisdiction

The mere availability of an alternative remedy does not automatically mean that civil court jurisdiction is barred.

The nature of the statutory remedy and the legislative scheme must be examined.

Section 9 vs Section 11

Section 9 concerns the jurisdiction of civil courts to entertain civil suits.

Section 11 concerns res judicata, which prevents a matter already directly and substantially decided between the parties from being re-litigated.

They deal with different concepts.

Practical Importance in Civil Litigation

Section 9 is often one of the first provisions to consider when the maintainability of a civil suit is challenged.

An advocate should examine:

• whether the dispute concerns a civil right;
• whether the suit is of a civil nature;
• whether another statute expressly bars civil court jurisdiction;
• whether exclusion can be implied from the statutory scheme;
• whether an adequate statutory remedy exists;
• whether the special tribunal acted within the limits of its statutory authority; and
• whether the alleged statutory bar actually applies to the relief claimed.

The burden of establishing exclusion of civil court jurisdiction is significant because the law starts with the general recognition of civil court jurisdiction.

Importance for Law Students and Judiciary Exams

Section 9 is a high-value provision for examinations.

The most important points to remember are:

1. Civil courts have jurisdiction over all suits of a civil nature.
2. The jurisdiction can be excluded expressly or impliedly.
3. Exclusion of jurisdiction is not readily inferred.
4. The existence of an alternative remedy does not automatically establish a bar.
5. Dhulabhai v. State of M.P. is the leading authority on exclusion of civil court jurisdiction.
6. Explanation I specifically recognises disputes concerning rights to property or office even where religious questions arise.
7. Order VII Rule 11(d) may become relevant where the suit is barred by law on the face of the plaint.

Important Questions to Prepare

1. Explain the scope and object of Section 9 CPC.
2. What is meant by a “suit of a civil nature”?
3. Distinguish between an express bar and an implied bar of civil court jurisdiction.
4. When can the jurisdiction of a civil court be excluded?
5. Explain the principles laid down in Dhulabhai v. State of Madhya Pradesh.
6. Does the existence of an alternative statutory remedy bar the jurisdiction of a civil court?
7. Explain the significance of Explanations I and II to Section 9.
8. Discuss the relationship between Section 9 and Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC.
9. Can a civil suit be maintained where the dispute involves religious questions?
10. Explain why exclusion of civil court jurisdiction is not readily inferred.

Key Legal Principles

1. Civil court jurisdiction is the general rule

Section 9 begins with a broad grant of jurisdiction over suits of a civil nature.

2. Exclusion is the exception

A party seeking to establish that a civil court has no jurisdiction must show that the jurisdiction has been validly excluded.

3. The bar may be express or implied

A statute can exclude civil court jurisdiction either through clear words or through a statutory scheme that necessarily implies exclusion.

4. Exclusion cannot ordinarily be presumed

Courts do not readily infer exclusion of civil court jurisdiction merely because another statutory forum exists.

5. The nature of the right is important

A dispute concerning property, office, money, contract or other civil rights is ordinarily of a civil nature.

6. Religious questions do not automatically remove civil jurisdiction

Where the dispute concerns a right to property or office, Explanation I preserves its character as a suit of a civil nature even if religious rites or ceremonies must be considered.

Key Takeaways

Concept	Principle
Section	Section 9 CPC
General rule	Civil courts have jurisdiction over suits of a civil nature
Exception	Cognizance is expressly or impliedly barred
Civil nature	Includes disputes concerning civil rights such as property and office
Express bar	Clear statutory exclusion of civil court jurisdiction
Implied bar	Exclusion inferred from the scheme and necessary implication of a statute
Leading case	Dhulabhai v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1969 SC 78
Related provision	Order VII Rule 11(d)
Key principle	Exclusion of civil court jurisdiction is not readily inferred

ALSO READ: Section 8 – Presidency Small Cause Courts

Conclusion

Section 9 CPC establishes the foundational principle that civil courts have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature, subject only to cases where their cognizance is expressly or impliedly barred.

The most important point is that civil court jurisdiction is the general rule, while exclusion is an exception. When a special statute creates an alternative forum, the court must examine the statutory language, scheme, rights created, remedies provided and legislative intention before concluding that civil jurisdiction has been excluded.

For examinations and practice, Dhulabhai v. State of Madhya Pradesh remains the leading authority for understanding when and how the jurisdiction of civil courts can be excluded.