1. ained if they are brought up in appeal or revision for the first time.

ii. Objection as to a local jurisdiction of a court does not fall into the same place as
inherent lack of jurisdiction, an objection to local jurisdiction of court can be waived.
Defects as to the section 15 to 21 of the code can be waived under sec 21.
iii. Kiran Singh v Chaman Paswan- Unless it had resulted in failure of justice, and the
policy of the legislature has been to treat objections to both territorial and pecuniary
jurisdictions as technical and not open to consideration by any appellate court, unless
there have been any prejudice on merits.
iv. If the defendant disputes the valuation of the suit by the plaintiff, it is the duty of the
trial court to inquire into it and pass an appropriate order.
1. No objection by appellate or revisional court unless (conditions co –exist)
a. Objection was taken in court of first instance
b. Taken up at earliest possible opportunity, cases where issues are
settled; before settlement of issues.
c. A consequent failure of justice
v. A court cannot adjudicate the subject matter which does not fall into its jurisdiction;
a jurisdiction to subject matter is regarded essential. Its validity can be challenged
even in collateral proceedings.
b. Execution proceedings
i. Principles of sec 21 also apply to execution proceedings
2. Bar of suit: No substantive suit can be filed to set aside a decree passed by a court on an
objection as to place of suing. It is implied that principle applicable to territorial limits will
apply to pecuniary limits also.

INSTITUTION OF A SUIT

1. .
2. Plaintiffs. Rule 1. All persons may be joined in one suit if:
a. Right to relief alleged to exist in each plaintiff arising out
of the same act or transaction; and
b. And the case exists if, a person brought separate suits
‘any’ common questions of fact and law would arise.
3. Defendants. Rule3. As same as above.
 a. Plaintiff can make any of the persons severally or jointly
and severally liable on any contract.
b. If in doubt as to who to obtain the redress from the
plaintiff may join two or more defendants in the suit.
c. If it seems that any defendant may cause delay to the suit
the court may pass an order for separate trials.
ii. Necessary Party. Whose presence is indispensable to the constitution of
the suit, against whom the relief is sought and without whom no effective
order can be sought. (Tests)
1. Right to some relief against such party
2. Not possible to pass an decree in absence of that party.
iii. Proper Party. On whose absence an order can be passed, but whose
presence is necessary for a complete and final decision on the
proceedings.
iv. If a necessary or proper party has not been joined to the suit it is a case of
non-joinder. A decree passed by a competent court will be set aside if it is
found that there is a ground for misdescreption of the defendant. Suit
cannot be dismissed.
v. If two or more parties are joined in a suit as plaintiffs or defendants in
contravention to order I (R 1 and 3)[who may be joined as plaintiffs or
defendant] and that they are neither necessary nor proper parties is a case
of misjoinder. Suit cannot be dismissed, neither a decree passed by a
competent court on misdescription will be set aside.
vi. B Prabahakar
1. has to be taken at the earliest possible stage.
2. If the plaintiff persists in not impleading a necessary party, the
consequences of non joinder may follow.
vii. O1 r10.
1. If plaintiff thinks he cannot get the relief he seeks without adding
other person as a plaintiff, or some other person is entitled to
relief an application for addition of plaintiff. The mistake must be
bonafide, can be at the appeallate stage, no person can be added
plaintiff without his consent.
2. Court can do so without an application by any party.
3. Plaintiff is dominus littis I.e best judge of his own cause.
4. A party cannot be added to add a new cause of action or to alter
the nature of the suit.
5. The presence should be necessary ‘as a party’. The test is not that
whether his presence is necessary for the ‘correct’ solution of the
dispute but whether the order would affect him or his interest be
 prejudiced. Mere fact that a fresh litigation may be avoided is no
point.
6. The suit shall be deemed to be initiated for him since he has
joined as a party. The plaint shall be amended and the amended
copies of plaints and summons shall be served to the defendant.
7. Transposition of parties, is shifting capacities of parties.
8. Representative Suit. If numerous person have the same interest
(not necessary a same cause of action) in the suit, one or more
than one of them can sue or be sued or defend the suit. The court
must give
a. of the suit is not in proper hands and the interests of the
plaintiff would be seriously affected to his prejudice.
Cannot be substituted as original parties (but if the
original party does not show due diligence, the court may
substitute him.
b. Decision of a common question and not a same cause of
action (may not be from same transaction). In the case
members of a class should have a common interest in the
subject matter and a common grievance and (to decide if
there exists common interests ^>)the relief sought should
be beneficial to all. (1990 642)
c. The representative should have a right to sue, an enabling
provision.
d. On behalf of inhabitants of a village wrt to village
property, members of a sect, caste, community.
e. Binding on all the parties unless obtained through fraud
or collusion, if the notice of institution of suit is not
given, the decree will bind only those parties who are on
record.
f. It is the courts duty to see to the proper issuance of
notice.
g. The decision acts as res jusidcata against
i. Who are on record
ii. Who are not on record and
yet covered under this rule.
h. The compliance of rule 8 is mandatory.
i. In a representative suit, the persons appointed to conduct
such suit are merely the representatives of other persons
who are constructively parties to the suit.
j.
b. subject matter in dispute;
c. cause of action and
d. relief.