PLACE OF SUING

(SECTION)

BRIEF OUTLINE
 There are various kinds of suits.
 Therefore, the jurisdiction of the courts to try such different kinds of suits is
also accordingly provided.
 The first thing to determine before filing the suit is the jurisdiction of the
Court, which is called the ‘place of suing.’
 Section 15 – 20 regulate the forum for the institution of suits.

 Section 15 – The Plaintiff shall file the suit in the lowest grade competent to
try it.
 Section 16 – 18 – Suits relating to immovable property.
 Section 19 – Compensation for wrong to person or movable property.
 Section 20 – Residuary provision for other suits.

MEANING OF ‘PLACE OF SUING’

 It simply means the venue for trial and has nothing to do with the
competency of the Court.
 ‘Place’ means place in India and the Courts referred to in these sections are
in India.
 The immovable property mentioned herein is also in India.

EVERY SUIT SHALL BE INSTITUTED IN THE COURT OF LOWEST GRADE COMPETENT

TO TRY IT.
(SECTION 15)

SCOPE & OBJECTIVE

 Section 15 is primarily concerned with pecuniary and subject matter
jurisdiction.
 The object is to ensure that the higher courts are not over crowded.
 To afford convenience to the parties and witnesses who may be examined in
such suits.
 Further, it ensures that the suit is brought before the lowest court which is
competent to try it.
 It is a rule of procedure.
 In case the higher court hears the case in contravention of the procedure
provided herein, it shall be merely irregular exercise of jurisdiction the
decision does not become void/nullity.

JURISDICTION
 The word ‘competent’ used in the section is in reference to jurisdiction.
 Jurisdiction means the extent of authority of a court to administer justice not
only with reference to the subject matter of the suit but also local and
pecuniary limits of its jurisdiction.
 The jurisdiction of the Court can be original or appellate.

1
  In exercise of original jurisdiction, the Court hears original suits and in
exercise of appellate jurisdiction the Court hears appeals.
 the question of jurisdiction is a question of law, and needs to be adjudicated
only on the basis of statutory provisions and not in consideration like
quantum of filing of cases.

PECUNIARY JURISDICTION
Section 15 refers to the Pecuniary Jurisdiction of the Courts to try a suit.

Meaning
 Pecuniary jurisdiction of a Court refers to the limit of amount or value of the
subject matter involved in a suit, that can be filed before it.
 A court cannot entertain a suit which exceeds the pecuniary jurisdiction
conferred upon it.
 For example, pecuniary jurisdiction of a Small Causes Court is, say upto
50,000. Therefore, a suit to recover Rs. 5,000 as damaged for breach of
contract can be tried by any of the Courts.

Valuation
 The pecuniary jurisdiction is determined on the basis of the value of the
relief claimed by a plaintiff.
 Ordinarily the value mentioned by the Plaintiff is taken as such by the Court
and it does not go into determining the correctness of the same.
 However, the Plaintiff is not free to choose any value in an arbitrary manner.
 Therefore, a Plaintiff can choose a forum by either undervaluing or
overvaluing the suit.
 However, if such undervalued or overvalued suit is brought before the Court,
and a decree is passed, the same shall not be set aside on that score alone
unless the same causes prejudice to the other party or the case on its merits.

Power and Duty of the Court

 Generally, the Court accepts the value of suit mentioned in the plaint.
 However, this practise does not bestow the plaintiff with arbitrary choice to
select the value to suit his own convenience.
 A court can pass a decree for an amount exceeding its pecuniary jurisdiction.
It is based on the principle that once the Court is seized of a matter It does
not loose jurisdiction by the amount finally ascertained in the suit.

2
TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION
For the purpose of territorial jurisdiction, the suits are divided into four classes:
a) Suits in respect of immovable property;
b) Suits for movable property;
c) Suits for compensation for wrong (tort); and
d) Other suits.

SUITS IN RESPECT OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY

Section 16 to 18 deal with suits relating to immovable property.

A. SUITS TO BE INSTITUTED WHERE SUBJECT MATTER IS SITUATED:

Classification of Suits
Suits can be classified into the following five types as per Sec. 16:
 Recovery of immovable property;
 Partition of immovable property;
 Foreclosure, sale or redemption (in case of mortgage) or charge upon
immovable property;
 Any other right in the immovable property;
 For torts to immovable property.

Scope & Objective

 Suits pertaining to the abovementioned disputed shall be filed before the
Court within local limits of whose jurisdiction the property situated.
 Section 16 related to the territorial jurisdiction of Civil Court.
 It refers to the area over which the Court enjoys influence.
 This section refers to two things:
a) Courts in India; and
b) Immovable Property situated in India.

Suits for recovery of Immovable Property

 A suit for the recovery of immovable property instituted in the city of
Bombay must be instituted in a Court in Bombay having jurisdiction to
entertain the suit.

Suit for Partition of Immovable Property

 If the property is situated in the jurisdiction of different courts then section
17 would apply.
 If part of property is situated in India and part is situated in foreign
jurisdiction, in such case the court will not entertain the suit pertaining to the
part in foreign jurisdiction.

Suit for Foreclosure, Sale or Redemption

 A mortgages certain immovable property to B to secure payment of money
lent to him by B. If A does not repay the loan on the due date, B may
institute a suit against A for sale of the mortgage property. Such suit will lie
before the Court within whose jurisdiction the property is situated.

3
Suit for determination of any other Right to or Interest in Immovable
Property
 There is no definition of the term ‘immovable property’ in the Code.
 Section 3(25) of the General Clauses Act defines immovable property as
land, benefits arising out of land and things attached to earth or
permanently fastened to anything attached to the earth.
 Trees standing on the land are immovable property.

Suits for wrong to immovable property

 It refers to torts affecting immovable property, such as trespass, nuisance,
infringement of easement, etc.

B. SUITS FOR IMMOVABLE PROPERTY SITUATE WITHIN JURISDICTION OF

DIFFERENT COURTS.

Scope & Objective

 Section 17 provides that where the immovable property in situated in within
jurisdiction of two different courts, in such case the suit can be instituted in
any of the courts where the property is situated.
 This section supplements section 16.
 It applies to suits falling within clauses (a) to (e) of that section.
 The object is to avoid multiplicity of proceedings.
 Sec. 17 applies in only those cases where there is one cause of action and
the basis of the whole plaintiff’s claim is the same in all and claims one trial
in respect of all the immovable properties.

C. WHERE THE LOCAL LIMITS OF JURISDICTION OF COURTS ARE UNCERTAIN.

Uncertainty of Local Limits of Jurisdiction

 Where it is uncertain as to within the local limits of jurisdiction of the two or
more Courts any immovable property is situated.
 Any one of the Courts may try and entertain the suit and dispose of the suit
accordingly.
 Provided there is a ground for uncertainty.
 The court shall record the statement to that effect before proceeding with
the trial of suit.

Purpose
 To avoid difficulties regarding jurisdiction that may arise where boundaries of
estate are either destroyed or altered by fluvial action.
 The absence of notification as to the boundaries of a district was held to
create a reasonable uncertainty.

Consequent failure of Justice

 The words ‘and there has been a consequent failure of justice’ have been
added to further restrict the taking of a technical objection as to the
territorial jurisdiction of the Court.

4
SUITS FOR COMPENSATION FOR WRONGS TO PERSONS & MOVABLES
(Section 19)

Scope & Objective

 This section is limited to torts in India and to defendants residing in India or
carrying in business in India or personally working for gain in India.
 Where a wrongful act is done at one place and the consequences of
the act ensue at another place, a suit may e brought either where the
action took place or where the consequences ensues.
 Where the wrong consists of a series of acts, a suit can be brought at
any place where any of the acts have been committed.

Wrong
 The expression ‘wrong done’ covers not only the act which caused the
wrong, but also the effect of the act.
 Wrong means a tort or actionable wrong i.e., an act which is legally wrongful
as prejudicially affecting the legal right of the plaintiff.
 For instance, a case of malicious prosecution may result in three kinds of
injuries:
a) Injury to the person unjustly prosecuted; and
b) Injury to his property; and
c) Injury to his reputation.
 If such person spends money to get himself exculpated, there is damage to
his property and such a case would fall within the residuary provision of
section 20.

Movable Property
 Section 19 only applies to wrongs done to movable property or the person
himself.
 If by act of the defendant the value of the property diminishes the plaintiff
can claim compensation for the damage.
 Basically, the plaintiff would claim compensation for the diminishing effect on
the value of the movable property or his own person.

Suits against Government

 The word resides refers to natural persons.
 The words ‘carries on business’ refers to commercial business.
 The section therefore does not apply to suits against the government for
damages for a tort where the tort is committed outside the jurisdiction.
 Such suits can only lie in the Court if the place where the tort is committed.

5
OTHER SUITS TO BE INSTITUTED WHERE THE DEFENDANT RESIDES OR
CAUSE OF ACTION ARISES
(SECTION 20)

Scope & Objective

 This section is designed to secure justice while ensuring that the parties to a
suit are not caused inconvenience.
 The defendant should not be put to trouble and expense of travelling long
distances in order to defend himself in cases which he may be involved.
 This section intends to ensure that the suit can be instituted at the place
where the defendant can defend the suit without trouble.

Limitation on application
 Section 20 not applies to cases where Section 16 – 19 do not apply.
 The limitations mentioned under this section are pecuniary and other
limitations.
 The plaintiff has the option of suing either:
a. Where the cause of action has accrued; OR
b. In the forum of the defendant; i.e., where the defendant resides OR
carries on business or personally works for gain.
 For the purposes of ascertaining the resident of defendant, it shall be seen
where he resided or carried on business at the commencement of the suit.

Defendant
 It includes a natural person.
 The term defendant also includes corporation or a company.

CLAUSE (A)

‘Actually, and voluntarily resides’

 Where a natural person lives with his own volition.
 Does not apply to juristic persons or company or corporation.
 The term actually means really, truly in effect and does not necessary
include domicile and excludes constructive residence.
 Something more than a temporary stay shall be proved.
 Residence may be of the following types:
 Legal;
 Technical;
 Actual;
 Physical.
 In order to prove residence, the following essentials shall be proved:
i. Factum of residence;
ii. Animus (element of intention)

‘Carries on Business’
 Applies to the natural as well as juristic persons carrying on business with or
without profits.
 The business might be carried on through others, however such person shall
be in control of the affairs of the business activity.

6
‘Personally works for Gain’
 In this case a person might be living outside the jurisdiction of the Court,
however he comes within the jurisdiction to work for gain.
 For example, an advocate living in Panchkula, who comes to Chandigarh to
appear in the High Court would be classified as personally working for gain in
the within the jurisdiction of the courts of Chandigarh.

CLAUSE (B)

Leave of the Court

 The leave of the Court is not required in all cases.
 It is required in the following cases:
 Where some of the defendants are within and others outside
jurisdiction;
 Where there are more than one jurisdiction and the Court does not
enjoy jurisdiction over all the jurisdiction.
 If the Court refuses leave, the suit cannot proceed unless the non-resident
defendants acquiesce.
 The leave must be granted in express terms and cannot be merely inferred
merely because no objection was allowed against the further proceedings in
the suit.

Acquiescence
 The Court can only proceed with suit, if the defendant acquiesces to its
jurisdiction.
 This applies in the above-mentioned cases i.e., where the defendant is not
within the jurisdiction of the Court.
 It also acts as a estoppel against the defendant.

CLAUSE (C)

Cause of Action
 Cause of action refers to a bundle of facts which are necessary for the
plaintiff to prove before he can succeed in the suit.
 It is necessary for the plaintiff to prove in order to support his right to the
judgment of the Court.
 The cause of action must be antecedent to the institution of the suit.
 If there is no cause of action disclosed in the plaint, then in such case the
plaint is liable to be rejected.
 Even if a part of cause of action arises within the local limits of jurisdiction of
a court, it has the jurisdiction to try the suit.

Suit Against Corporation – Exp. II

 Irrespective of the provisions of the companies act, the domicile of the
trading company is fixed by the situation of its principal place of business.
That is to say, its chief office where the central management and control are
actually to be found.

7
8
9
FORUM SHOPPING
 Forum Shopping refers to the practise of litigants in some cases of
deliberately searching multiple courts or jurisdiction in order to file or
transfer the case to one that is most likely to give the party results it wants.
 The Supreme Court has not only disapproved the practise of forum shopping
but strongly deprecated the same.
 For instance, in the case of Union of India v. Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd.
though the registered office of the company was at Ludhiana, a petition was
filed against it in the High Court of Calcutta and ex parte ad interim relief
was obtained by the petitioner. The Supreme Court set aside the order and
observed that the action was taken as a part of manoeuvring legal battle.

10