By an agreement dated 15-10-2004 Mr.

X agreed to purchase a flat at Gurgaon from ABC

Ltd. It was specifically mentioned in the agreement that the only court at Delhi will have
jurisdiction in case of any dispute between the parties under the said agreement. Mr. X filed a
suit against ABC Ltd. for specific performance of an agreement to sale of the said flat at
Delhi in 2005. The defendant ABC Ltd. appeared & submitted to the jurisdiction of Delhi
Court & specifically admitted the jurisdiction of Delhi court by filing the Written Statement
in the year 2007. The defendant thereafter amended the Written Statement & objected to the
jurisdiction of the Delhi court. The decree is passed by the Delhi court & ordered the
defendant to enforce the said agreement.

A. Can the defendant in the appeal raise the objection about placer of suing?

B. Whether the decree passed by the Delhi court is valid?

 Introduction

“Ubi Jus Ibi Remedium” which means that where there is right there is a remedy, a basic
principle of English right which is accepted by the Indian law. When a person right is
curtailed or being infringed then he has to approach to the appropriate forum or the
appropriate judicial forum for the award of compensation. Such judicial form must have an
authority to adjudicate on the matter. the judicial forum must have jurisdiction to deal with
the matter. Each Court has a different jurisdiction.

In general meaning, Jurisdiction is the power of the Court to take the cognizance of an
offence and to determine the cause of action. According to Black’s Law dictionary
Jurisdiction means “A court’s power to decide on a case or issue a decree.”

The jurisdiction was defined in the case of  Hirday Nath v. Ram Chandr. The High Court of
Calcutta stated that jurisdiction may be defined as judicial power of Court to hear and
determine the cause and adjudicate upon it.

Jurisdiction is decided mainly on the basis of:-

 Pecuniary value
 Local limits of Court
  The subject matter of Court

So the Court before taking the cognizance of offence, the following points needs to be taken
into consideration:-

 The pecuniary value of the suit

 The nature of the case
 The territorial limits of the court

It is not only sufficient that forum must have an authority to deal with the matter or that the
court has a pecuniary jurisdiction or the court has a local jurisdiction but the court must be
competent enough to grant the relief in such matter. In the case of Official Trustee vs
Sachindra Nath  ,AIR 1969 SC 823The court held that in order to deal with the matter the
court must not be enough to decide a particular matter but also the court has the power to pass the
order sought for.

Jurisdiction of Civil Court (Section 9)

The word civil is not defined in section 9 itself. According to Dictionary “civil rights is private
rights and remedies that are different from the criminal and political”. The word “nature”
indicates the identity or essential character of a person or thing. So, we can draw the definition of
suits of civil nature means that the suit in a dispute relating to private rights and the suit must not
be related to a political or criminal matter. The civil court shall have jurisdiction to try all the
suits except the suit which is impliedly or expressly barred.

A suit which is related to the right to property or suit in which office is contested is of civil nature
suit, notwithstanding that such right may depend entirely on the decisions of questions as to
religious ceremonies or rites. It is immaterial whether the fees to the office are attached or not, or
whether such an office is attached to a particular place or not.

The suit which is expressly barred means the suit which is barred by any statute or any other law
for the time being in force. The legislature has an option to bar the jurisdiction of the civil court
with respect to a particular class of suit keeping itself with the ambit of the power conferred on
Constitution of India. The establishment of the tribunal has taken away the jurisdiction of the
civil court with regard to the subject matter that is allotted to the tribunal on the first instance,
however, if any questions related to law raised, or any provision of the act so created the tribunal
can be looked into by the civil court.  The civil court has no jurisdiction over the matter in which
court under the Code of Criminal Procedure, Revenue Court has exclusive jurisdiction, or matter
is dealt with special tribunal dealt under special statutes. example Motor Accidents Claims
Tribunal, Cooperative Tribunal. A suit is impliedly barred when it is barred by either the general
principle of law or general conduct of law. The basic purpose of barred impliedly is that the court
should not deal with the matter which causes injurious to the public or which is against the
public will.

Place of suing

Section 15 to 20 deals with the place of suing

There are three kinds of jurisdiction to determine the place of suing:-

 Territorial jurisdictions
 Pecuniary jurisdictions
 Subject matter jurisdiction

Whenever the suit is brought before the court the first question is to determine is whether the
court has a jurisdiction to deal with the matter. If the court has all these (territorial, pecuniary,
or subject matter jurisdiction then only the court has the power to deal with the case. In the
case, if the court does not have any of the above-mentioned factors then it will be considered
as lack of jurisdiction or the irregular exercise of jurisdiction. when the court who does not
have jurisdiction decide the case and give decision then such decision will be considered as
void or voidable depending upon the different circumstances

The issue arises:- who will determine the value of the suit?

Ordinarily, the plaintiff makes the valuation of the suit for the purpose of determining the
pecuniary jurisdiction of the court unless it prima facie appears to the court that the valuation
was not done correctly.  When the court finds that the valuation was either done overvalued
or undervalued, then the valuation will be done by the Court and the court will direct the
party to approach the appropriate forum.
The jurisdiction of the court is decided by the plaintiff valuation but not the amount for which
decree is passed.

Let’s us understand from an example, if the court has a pecuniary jurisdiction of Rs 15000
and the suit for recovery of accounts is filed on the valuation of suit done by the plaintiff. The
valuation was of Rs 15000. Later the courts find that Rs 20000 is due, in this case, the court is
not deprived of its jurisdiction to pass a decree for that amount.

It is the valuation done by the plaintiff to determine the jurisdiction of the court. But this does
not mean that the plaintiff is set free to file for any arbitrary value and to choose the court in
which he wants to file a suit.

When the court finds that valuation is done improperly for the purpose of avoiding the
jurisdiction of the appropriate court, the court may require the plaintiff to prove that valuation
was done in a proper manner.

Example

C is a tradesman in Bangalore, D carries on business in Hyderabad. D, by his agent in Bangalore,

buys goods from C and requests C to deliver them to Amarchand Company. C delivers the goods
in Bangalore accordingly. C may sue for the price of goods either in Bangalore where the cause
of action arises or in Hyderabad where D carries on his business.

Objections to jurisdiction (Section 21)

If objection related to the place of suing:-

 pecuniary limits 
 competence of the executing court with regards to local limits of its jurisdiction

is not brought in the Court at the first instance, before settlement or in a case where the issues are
settled, then no objection will be allowed by the Revisional or Appellate Court unless there is a
failure of justice. 

Non- Applicability
  Territorial jurisdiction
 Pecuniary jurisdiction

In the case of Karan Singh vs Chaman Paswan  AIR 1969 SC 823

When the court commits an error in entertaining the suit with regard to pecuniary or territorial
jurisdiction then the decision given by such court will not be void but will be considered as the
illegal exercise of jurisdiction.

Bar on a suit to set aside a decree on objection as to the place of suing (section 21 A)

No suit shall be brought up challenging the validity of decree passed in a former suit between
the same parties or between the parties litigating under the same title on any ground based on
an objection as to a place of suing.

Conclusion

The concept of the place of suing is very important as it helps to determine the jurisdiction of
each court. It helps to the plaintiff where to file a suit. It saves the time of the court in
determining the jurisdiction of the court.