ANALYZE AND EXPLAIN THE SCOPE OF JURISDICTION OF CIVIL COURT GENERALLY AND SPECIALLY AS PER THE CODE OF CIVIL

PROCEDURE, 1908

JURISDICTION OF CIVIL COURTS

“Analyze & explain the scope of jurisdiction of civil court generally & specially as per the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.”

Abstract – This article describes the provisions under sections 9 and 151 of
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. It attempts to establish the fact that the
court can take cognizance of, and adjudicate upon, all suits of a civil nature.
The only restraint upon this power of the court is the express or implied bar
placed on the jurisdiction which could be divided in the category of general
and special jurisdiction of the court; however, even this bar can be overcome
by the court in the interest of securing justice for the litigants as well as in
order to prevent misuse of the processes of the Court. These conclusions have
been substantiated through cases that have been decided primarily by the
Supreme Court throughout the course of history, ranging from the 1960s to
current times.

Law can be classified principally on the basis of its substantive and procedural aspects. While
the substantive law defines what the law is, procedural law deals with how the proceedings
shall occur in order to best apply the substantive law. The Civil Procedure Code (CPC) of 1908
is a prime example of procedural law.

According to its preamble, the Civil Procedure Code is “An Act to consolidate and amend the
laws relating to the procedure of the Courts of Civil Judicature”.1 This means that the CPC
deals with the procedure of application of law to all matters of civil nature. This Code was first
enacted in India in the year 1859 by Sir Charles Wood. It underwent a number of changes with
time, including addition of provisions, amendment of existing sections, etc. in the years 1877,
1879 and 1882. Finally, in 1908 the draft Code of Civil Procedure as it is known today was
introduced in the Legislature by Sir Earle Richards and approved by the Governor General of
India.2 The Act came into force on 1st January 1909.3

1
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Preamble
2
Sambhunath Tiadi, The Civil Procedure Code – 1908 – A brief Synopsis, 21 Mar 2014, retrieved on 19 Jul 2018
from https://www.speakingtree.in/blog/the-civil-procedure-code1908a-brief-synoposis
3
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Sec 1

1
 ANALYZE AND EXPLAIN THE SCOPE OF JURISDICTION OF CIVIL COURT GENERALLY AND SPECIALLY AS PER THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908

According to the Civil Procedure Code there are 5 kinds of jurisdiction on which the civil courts
decide whether it comes within the original jurisdiction power given to them or not. Civil court
will have to specifically analyze if the matter is of general jurisdiction or of special in nature.

The kinds of jurisdictions only define and specify the general and special jurisdiction of courts
in an unsaid manner.

Jurisdiction is mainly divided in; (a) Civil and criminal Jurisdiction; (b) Territorial or Local
Jurisdiction; (c) Pecuniary Jurisdiction; (d) Original or appellate Jurisdiction; (e) Jurisdiction
as to subject matter.

A. Civil and criminal Jurisdiction: Civil Jurisdiction is the one which specifically handles
and decides the disputes which are of a civil nature. Whereas, the criminal jurisdiction
is the ones where the court deals with crime and the accord available to court is to
punish offenders.

B. Territorial or Local Jurisdiction: Every court has a limit to its geographical territorial
area and beyond which the court has no effective and immediate control over it and it
lies beyond the limits of the court.

C. Pecuniary Jurisdiction: The Civil Procedure Code, will have jurisdiction over those
suits the amount/ value of the subject-matter of which does not exceed the pecuniary
limits of its jurisdiction. 4 For E.g.: High Courts and District courts have no pecuniary
jurisdiction but the small causes court cannot entertain a suit where the claim exceeds
beyond Rs 1000.

D. Original Jurisdiction: Original Jurisdiction is specifically the jurisdiction inherent in, or

conferred upon, a court of first stance. Whereas, the appellate court is the power of
authority conferred upon a superior court to re hear by way of appeal, revision, etc.5

E. Jurisdiction as to subject matter: —When a Court of Small Causes under the Provincial
Small Causes Courts Act, 1887, has jurisdiction in any locality, ordinary Civil Courts
cannot try suits, which are cognizable by that Court unless it is expressly provided
otherwise by the aforesaid Act or any other enactment.6

4
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Sec 6
5
C.K. Takwani, Civil Procedure with Limitation Act, Eighth Edition, Pg. 44
6
Provincial Small Causes Courts Act, 1887, Sec 16

2
 ANALYZE AND EXPLAIN THE SCOPE OF JURISDICTION OF CIVIL COURT GENERALLY AND SPECIALLY AS PER THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908

F. Special Jurisdiction—Under certain enactments. Courts of Subordinate Judges have no

jurisdiction at all to take cognizance of proceedings under those enactments (e.g., under
the Companies Act, 1956, the Indian Divorce Act, 1869, etc.). There are proceedings
under certain other enactments of which subordinate Judges can take cognizance only
if specifically empowered in that behalf.7

Examples of Special Jurisdiction:

1. Matter raised in defense which is solely triable by Revenue Court—If in a suit which,
as framed, is within jurisdiction of a Civil Court, a defendant raises a plea with respect
to a matter which can be taken cognizance of only by a Revenue Court the procedure
laid down in the proviso to sub-section (3) of Section 77 of the Punjab Tenancy Act
must be followed and the plaint returned for presentation to the Collector.

2. Question of title arising in land partition proceedings before Revenue Officers—A Civil
Court can only entertain a suit relating to a dispute as to title in revenue-assessed land
arising in partition proceedings when a Revenue Officer declines to determine the
question himself as though he were a Civil Court and refuses to proceed to partition
until the question is determined by a competent Court. The plaint should therefore, refer
to the order of the Revenue Officer, made under Section 117, sub-section (1), of the
Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, and the Civil Court should satisfy itself that an order
giving it jurisdiction has been so made. A copy of such order accompanies to plaint.

Section 9 of the CPC reads, “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”8 while section 151 reads, “Nothing in this code shall be deemed
to limit or otherwise effect the inherent powers of the court to make such orders as may be
necessary for the ends of the justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the court”.9

Section 9 and 151 of the Code have expressly stated that the courts have the jurisdiction and
inherent powers to look into any matter of civil nature. Section 9 has imposed a restraint stating
that the provision does not apply in cases where the court’s jurisdiction has been expressly or
impliedly barred, but section 151 ensures that the court may do so to issue orders necessary for
justice and to prevent misuse of the processes of courts.

7
Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, S 4-A, Indian Succession Act, S 388
8
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Sec 9
9
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Sec 151

3
 ANALYZE AND EXPLAIN THE SCOPE OF JURISDICTION OF CIVIL COURT GENERALLY AND SPECIALLY AS PER THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908

This has been supported by the Courts a number of times through various judgments. For
instance, in the case of Jaipur Mineral Development Syndicate v. The Commissioner of I.T.10,
the Supreme Court stated that the Courts have the power under Section 151, in the absence of
any express or implied prohibition, to pass an order as may be necessary for the ends of justice
or to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court. Further, in the case of KK. Veluswamy v N.
Palaanisamy11 the Supreme Court held that Section 151 of the Code recognizes the
discretionary power inherited by every court as a necessary corollary for rendering justice in
accordance with law, to do what is ‘right’ and undo what is ‘wrong’. It also laid down the scope
of Section 151 in detail.

In P.M.A. Metropolitan v. Moran Mar Marthoma12, while considering section 9 of the CPC, the
Supreme Court held that all civil suits are cognizable unless barred. If the suit matches the
description given under the section, no Court can refuse to entertain it. The section is available
in every case where the principle dispute is one that affects rights that are not only civil but of
a civil nature. The next year, the court stated in M.P. Electricity Board, Jabalpur v Vijaya
Timber Co.13 that the normal rule is that the civil Courts have jurisdiction to try all suits of civil
nature and exclusion of jurisdiction cannot be readily inferred.

In Kihoto Hollohan v Zachillhu14 a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court has held that a
provision which seeks to exclude the jurisdiction of the Courts should be construed strictly.
Otherwise, in the absence of any such enactment or provision, the exclusion of jurisdiction
does not arise.

The case of Shiv Kumar Chadha v Municipal Corporation of Delhi15 is noteworthy since the
Apex Court considered multiple older cases on jurisdiction of the Civil Courts and finally held
that the jurisdiction of the Civil Court could not be ousted in all circumstances. In the
concluding remarks, the learned Judges have held that, “In spite of the bar placed on the power
of the Court, orders passed under such statutes can be examined on ‘jurisdictional question’.”

The apex court has laid a heavy burden on the party seeking to oust the jurisdiction of the civil
court and instead vest it in another authority. Such an ouster is not readily accepted in the

10
AIR 1977 SC 1348
11
(2011) 11 SCC 275
12
AIR 1995 SC 2001
13
Civil Appeal No. 3301 Of 1983
14
1992 Supp. (2) SCC 651
15
1993 SCC (3) 161

4
 ANALYZE AND EXPLAIN THE SCOPE OF JURISDICTION OF CIVIL COURT GENERALLY AND SPECIALLY AS PER THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908

absence of evidence.16 In S. Vanathan Muthuraja v. Ramalingam17, the Court had already held
that favor is given to existence of jurisdiction of civil courts and therefore exclusion is an
exception.

In a 1964 Orissa High Court case, Bahadur Pradhani v Gopal Patel18, the Court examined the
scope of inherent powers under Section 151 and stated that the inherent powers of the court are
not limited or otherwise affected by the provisions of the Code. It is a power inherent in the
court by virtue of its duties to do justice between the parties before it.

Justice Subbarao made a very notable observation in the case of Ram Chand & Sons Sugar
Mills Ltd v Kanhayalal Bhargava19 and states that “Whatever limitations are imposed by
construction of the provisions of Section 151 of the Code, they do not control the undoubted
power of this court conferred under section 151 of the Code to make a suitable order to prevent
the abuse of the process of the court”.

Therefore, in light of the cases mentioned herein, it can be concluded that it is today a well-
established fact that Civil Courts have an inherent jurisdiction to look into all civil matters and
also those matters of general and special in nature.

16
Mahant Dooj Dass v Udasin Panchayati Bara Akhara (2008) 12 SCC 181
17
(1997) 6 SCC 143
18
AIR 1964 Ori 134
19
AIR 1966 SC 1899

5
 ANALYZE AND EXPLAIN THE SCOPE OF JURISDICTION OF CIVIL COURT GENERALLY AND SPECIALLY AS PER THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES

 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

 www.scconline.com

 www.manupatra.com

 www.speakingtree.in

 dictionary.cambridge.org

 www.lawctopus.com

CASES CITED

 Jaipur Mineral Development Syndicate v. The Commissioner of I.T. AIR 1977 SC 1348

 KK. Veluswamy v N. Palaanisamy (2011) 11 SCC 275

 P.M.A. Metropolitan v. Moran Mar Marthoma AIR 1995 SC 2001

 M.P. Electricity Board, Jabalpur v Vijaya Timber Co. Civil Appeal No. 3301 Of 1983

 Kihoto Hollohan v Zachillhu 1992 Supp. (2) SCC 651

 Shiv Kumar Chadha v Municipal Corporation of Delhi 1993 SCC (3) 161

 Mahant Dooj Dass v Udasin Panchayati Bara Akhara (2008) 12 SCC 181

 S. Vanathan Muthuraja v. Ramalingam (1997) 6 SCC 143

 Bahadur Pradhani v Gopal Patel AIR 1964 Ori 134

 Ram Chand & Sons Sugar Mills Ltd v Kanhayalal Bhargava AIR 1966 SC 1899