Central University of South Bihar

SCHOOL OF LAW AND GOVERNANCE

Under the guidance of Assit Prof: Deep Narayan

Subject : Civil Procedure Code

Project Topic on: Jurisdiction of Court
Name : Shubham Abhijit

Course : B.A. LL.B. (Hons)

Semester : Vth

Enrollment No. : CUSB1613125046

1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

You are most welcome in my project work of “Civil Procedure Code” on the topic
“,Jurisdiction of Court”. This project is given by our honorable subject Asst Professor “Deep
Narayan ” and first of all I would like to thank him for providing me such a nice topic and
making me aware as well providing me a lot of ideas regarding the topic and the methods to
complete the project.

I would like to thank all the Library staffs who helped me to find all the desired books
regarding the topic as the whole project revolves around the doctrinal methodology of research. I
would like to thank to my seniors as well as class mates who helped me in the completion of this
project. I would also like to thanks to my Parents who encouraged me to do this project. Last but
not the least, thanks to all who directly or indirectly helped me in completing of this project.

I have made this project with great care and tried to put each and every necessary
information regarding the topic. So at the beginning I hope that if once you will come inside this
project you will be surely glad.

-Shubham Abhijit

2
 Index
1. Introduction page. 4
2. History of Court page. 5
3. The constitution and Judiciary page . 5
4. The Court of Chancery page . 6
5. Basis to Determine Jurisdiction page . 7
6. Courts and Tribunals page. 8
7. Kinds of Jurisdiction page . 8
8. Pecuniary Jurisdiction page. 10
9. Courts to Try all suits unless bared Sec(9) page. 11
 Suits of Civil Nature page . 12
 Cognizance Not barred page. 13
10.Exclusion of Jurisdiction of Civil Courts page . 14
11.General Principles page . 15
12.Conclusion page 16
13.Bibliography page 17

3
 Introduction
The term “ Jurisdiction” has not been defined in the code . The word ( jurisdiction ) is derived
from latin term “ juris” and “dicto” which means “I speak by law”.

Jurisdiction of court means the extent of authority of a court to administer justice prescribed
with refrence to the subject- matter, presented in a formal way for its decision. Thus jurisdiction
of court means the extent of authority of a court to administer justice prescribed with the
reference to the subject – matter , pecuniary value and local limits .1

Jurisdiction in its classical conception, means to hear and determine a cause, and to adjudicate
and exercise any judicial power in relation to it . In other words by jurisdiction is meant the
authority on which the court decides a case that is litigated before it or it takes cognizance of a
matter presented in any formal way for its decision. In simple words, jurisdiction may be
defined as the power of court to hear and determine a cause, to adjudicate and exercise any
judicial power in court in relation to rights of parties in a suit. Thus authority of a court to
adjudicate upon a cause is known as “jurisdiction of court”. In other words, ‘jurisdiction of
court denotes the authority of a court to try and determine a cause and to adjudicate upon it.2

Jurisdiction is granted to a court by the legislature. If the court is vested with the power or
authority to try and adjudicate upon a cause, it is said to have jurisdiction over the matter’,
otherwise it is said to have no jurisdiction over the matter”. A suit is not maintainable in a court
which is not vested with the jurisdiction to try the subject matter of the suit. If a court not
having jurisdiction over the matter in a suit ventures to hear and decide such suit and passes a
decree , that decree is void . It is thus necessary that the court exercise their power to adjudicate
upon a cause, within their domain or jurisdiction prescribed by the Legislature. If they step out of
it, the judgment pronounced by them shall be of no consequence and makes it ultra vires null
void.

1
C.K Takwani ,The Code of Civil Procedure , 1908, EBC , 8th edition 2017, page no -40.
2
D.N. Mathur ,The Code of Civil Procedure , 1908, Central Law Publication , 3rd edition 2017, page no -92.

4
History of court

The Indian Judiciary administers a common law system of legal jurisdiction, in which customs,
precedents and legislation, all codify the law of the land. It has in fact, inherited the legacy of the legal
system established by the then colonial powers and the princely states since the mid-19th century, and
has partly retained characteristics of practices from the ancient and medieval times.

There are various levels of judiciary in India – different types of courts, each with varying powers
depending on the tier and jurisdiction bestowed upon them. They form a strict hierarchy of importance,
in line with the order of the courts in which they sit, with the Supreme Court of India at the top,
followed by High Courts of respective states with district judges sitting in District Courts and Magistrates
of Second Class and Civil Judge (Junior Division) at the bottom.

The Constitution and the Judiciary

The judiciary interprets the Constitution as its final arbiter. It is its duty as mandated by the Constitution,
to be its watchdog, by calling for scrutiny any act of the legislature or the executive, who otherwise, are
free to enact or implement these, from overstepping bounds set for them by the Constitution. It acts like
a guardian in protecting the fundamental rights of the people, as enshrined in the Constitution, from
infringement by any organ of the state. It also balances the conflicting exercise of power between the
Centre and a State or among states, as assigned to them by the Constitution.

Independence of the judiciary is a basic feature of the Constitution and which being inalienable, means
which cannot be taken away from it by any act or amendment by the legislature or the executive.

5
 The Court of Chancery

The Court of Chancery was a court of equity in England and Wales that followed a set of loose
rules to avoid the slow speed of change and evitable harshness (or "inequity") of the common
law. The Chancery had jurisdiction over all matters of equity, including trusts, land law, the
estates of lunatics and the guardianship of infants. Its initial role was somewhat different: as an
extension of the Lord Chancellor's role as Keeper of the King's Conscience, the Court was an
administrative body fundamentally concerned with conscientious law. Thus the Court of
Chancery had a far greater remit than the common law courts, whose decisions it had the
jurisdiction to overrule for much of its existence, and was far more flexible. Until the 19th
century, the Court of Chancery could apply a far wider range of remedies than common law
courts, such as specific performance and injunctions, and had some power to grant damages in
special circumstances. With the shift of the Exchequer of Pleas towards a common law court and
loss of its equitable jurisdiction by the Administration of Justice Act 1841, the Chancery became
the only national equitable body in the English legal system.
Academics estimate that the Court of Chancery formally split from and became independent of
the Curia Regis in the mid-14th century, at which time it consisted of the Lord Chancellor and
his personal staff, the Chancery. Initially an administrative body with some judicial duties, the
Chancery experienced an explosive growth in its work during the 15th century, particularly
under the House of York, which academics attribute to its becoming an almost entirely judicial
body. From the time of Elizabeth I onwards the Court was severely criticized for its slow pace,
large backlogs, and high costs. Those problems persisted until its dissolution, despite being
mitigated somewhat by reforms, particularly during the 19th century. Attempts at fusing the
Chancery with the common law courts began in the 1850s, and finally succeeded with
the 1873 and 1875 Supreme Court of Judicature Acts, which dissolved the Chancery and created
a new unified High Court of Justice, with the Chancery Division – one of three divisions of the
High Court – succeeding the Court of Chancery as an equitable body.
For much of its existence the Court was formally led by the Lord Chancellor, assisted by the
judges of the common law courts. The staff of the court included a large number of clerks, led by
the Master of the Rolls, who regularly heard cases on his own. In 1813 a Vice-Chancellor was
appointed to deal with the Chancery's increasing backlogs, and two more were appointed in
1841. Offices of the Chancery were sold by the Lord Chancellor for much of its history, raising
large amounts of money. Many of the clerks and other officials were sinecures who, in lieu of
wages, charged increasingly exorbitant fees to process cases, one of the main reasons why the
cost of bringing a case to the Chancery was so high. The 19th century saw the abolition of many
sinecure offices and the institution of a wage and pension for the Lord Chancellor to curb the
sale of offices, and later the right to appoint officials was transferred from the Chancellor to the
Crown.

6
Basis to Determine Jurisdiction: It is well – settled that for deciding the
jurisdiction of a civil court, the averments made in the plaint are material. To put it differently,
the jurisdiction of a court should normally be decided on the basis of the case put forward by
the plaintiff in his plaint and not by the defendant in his written statement.

Abdulla Bin Ali vs. Galappa3 – The plaintiff filed a suit in the civil court for the declaration of
the title and for the possession and mesne profits treating the defandants as tresspasers. The
defendants contended that the civil court had no jurisdiction since he was a tenant.4

Jurisdictional Fact
The jurisdiction of court, tribunal or authority may depend upon fulfillment of certain conditions
or upon existence of a particular fact. This is called “jurisdictional fact” . The existence of such a
preliminary or collateral fact is sine qua non or condition precedent to the assumptions of
jurisdiction by the authority. If it exists, the authority has jurisdiction and it can act. If it does not
exist, there is no jurisdiction and the authority cannot act. If the authority wrongly assumes
existence of such fact, a writ of certiorari can be issued.5

Decision as to Jurisdiction
Whether a court has a jurisdiction or not has to be decided with reference to the initial
assumption of jurisdiction by that court. The question depends not on the truth or falsehood of
the facts into which it has to enquire, or upon the correctness of its findings on these facts, but
upon their nature and it is determinable “at the commencement, not at the conclusion of the
inquiry”.

Whenever the jurisdiction of a court is challenged, that court has inherent jurisdiction
to decide the said question. Every court has inherent jurisdiction to decide the said question.
Every court or tribunal is not only entitled but bound to determine whether the matter it is asked
to exercise its jurisdiction comes within jurisdiction or not. Similarly , where a tribunal derives
its jurisdiction from the statute that creates it and imposes conditions under which it can function
, it goes without saying that before the tribunal assumes jurisdiction in a matter , It must be
satisfied that those conditions in fact exists . Such facts are known as preliminary or
jurisdictional facts.

3
(1985)2 SCC 54: AIR SC 577
4
supra note 1 at page 44
5
Supra note 1 at page 46

7
Courts And Tribunals
A civil court has inherent power to decide the question whether it has jurisdiction to entertain,
deal with and decide the matter which has come before it.

The jurisdiction of a tribunal or any other authority stands on a different footing. Where a
parliament has invested such tribunal with the power to decide and determine finally the
preliminary facts on which its jurisdiction depends, it can decide such facts and the finding
recorded by the tribunal cannot be challenged by certiorari. But where a statute creating or
establishing a tribunal does not confer that power on a tribunal, an inferior tribunal cannot , on a
wrong decision on preliminary or collateral fact, assume and confer on itself jurisdiction which it
does not posses. Such an order can be challenged by certiorari.

Kinds of Jurisdiction

(1) Civil and Criminal Jurisdiction- Civil Jurisdiction is that which concerns and deals
with disputes of “ civil nature”. Criminal Jurisdiction , on the other hand , relates to
crimes and punishes offenders.6
(2) Territorial or Local Jurisdiction - Every court has its own or local or territorial limits
beyond which it cannot exercise its jurisdiction . these limits are fixed by the government.
The District judge has to exercise jurisdiction within his district and not outside it . The
High Court has jurisdiction over the territory of a state within which it is situate and not
beyond it.
Again , a court has no jurisdiction to try a suit for movable property situated beyond its
local limits.7
(3) Pecuniary Jurisdiction
The code provides that a court will have that jurisdiction only over those suits the amount
or value of the subject- matter of which does not exceed the pecuniary limits of its
jurisdiction . Some courts have unlimited pecuniary jurisdiction , e.g, High Courts having

6
Supra note 1 at page 47
7
C.K Takwani ,The Code of Civil Procedure , 1908, EBC , 8th edition 2017, page no -47

8
 jurisdiction to try suits up to a particular amount. Thus , a pesecidency Small Causes
Court cannot entertain a suit in which the amount claimed exceeds RS 1000.

(4) Jurisdiction as to subject-matter: Different courts have been empowered to decide

different types of suits. Certain courts are precluded from entertaining certain suits. Thus
, a Presidency small cause court has no jurisdiction to try suits for specific performance
of contract , partition of immovable property , foreclosure or redemption of mortgage,
etc. Similarly, in respect of testamentary matter, divorce cases, probate proceedings,
insolvency proceedings, etc., only the District Judge or Civil Judge (senior Division) has
jurisdiction.
(5) Original or appellate Jurisdiction: Original jurisdiction is jurisdiction inherent in , or
conferred upon , a court of first instance . In the exercise of that jurisdiction, a court of
first instance decides suits, petitions or applications . Appellate jurisdiction is the power
or authority conferred upon a superior court to re – hear by way of appeal, revision, etc.,
of cause which have been tried and decided by courts of original jurisdiction.
Munsiff courts, Courts of civil judges, small causes courts are having original
jurisdiction only, while District Court , High courts have original as well as appellate
jurisdiction.
(6) Exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction: Exclusive jurisdiction is that
which confers sole power on one court or tribunal to try, deal with and
decide a case. No court or authority can render a judgment or give a decision
in the case or class of cases.
(7) General and Special jurisdiction General jurisdiction extends to all cases
comprised within a class or classes of causes. Special or limited jurisdiction,
on the other hand, is jurisdiction which is confined to special, particular or
limited causes.
(8) Legal and equitable jurisdiction Legal jurisdiction is a jurisdiction
exercised by Common Law courts in England, while equitable jurisdiction is
a jurisdiction exercised by Equity Courts. Courts in India are courts of both,
law and equity.8
(9) Municipality and foreign jurisdiction Municipal or domestic jurisdiction
is a jurisdiction exercised by municipal courts, i.e. courts in a foreign
country. A judgment rendered or decision given by a foreign court is
“foreign judgment”.

8
Supra note 6 at page 47

9
 (10) Expounding and Expanding Jurisdiction
Expounding jurisdiction means to define, clarify and explain jurisdiction.
Expanding jurisdiction means to expand, enlarger extend the jurisdiction. It
is the duty of the court to expand its jurisdiction. It is however, not proper for the court to
expand its jurisdiction.

Pecuniary Jurisdiction
Section 6 – Save in so far as is otherwise expressly provided , noting herein contained shall
operate shall operate to give any Court jurisdiction over suits the amount or value of the
subject – matter of which exceeds the pecuniary limits (if any ) of its ordinary jurisdiction

Meaning of pecuniary jurisdiction: When law declares a court to be competent to

entertain a subject matter of a restricted value, then such authority of court is referred to as
pecuniary jurisdiction. To cite an example , Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division in the State
of Maharastra is competent to try the suits having value up tp RS one lac only. Thus , the
pecuniary jurisdiction of court of Civil judge , junior Division is said to be Rs 1 lac. As a
necessary consequence of this pecuniary jurisdiction , the Court of Civil Judge , Junior
Division cannot entertain and try a suit the value of value of which exceeds its pecuniary
limits i.e, Rs 1 lac and if it does , the decree passed in such suit shall be with jurisdiction and
hence null and void. Thus , pecuniary jurisdiction relates to value of suit.9

Pecuniary jurisdiction is a restraint on authority of court in respect of suit value:

Section 6 imposes a restriction on the power of the court and provides that if the pecuniary
limits are prescribed for a court, the suits of the value higher than such limit are not triable by
such courts. In other words courts cannot entertain a suit, the subject matter of which is
valued beyond courts pecuniary jurisdiction.

Case Gordhan lal v. C.P Institute, Khandwa, 10

It was held that section 6 of the code in its ultimate analysis does not more than mere
declaring in general terms the object of the code not to give jurisdiction over the suits to any
civil court wider than that determined by the pecuniary limits if any of its ordinary
jurisdiction.

9
D.N. Mathur ,The Code of Civil Procedure , 1908, Central Law Publication , 3rd edition 2017, page no -92.
10

10
 Case Dr Francisco luis D. Souza v. Vithal Bhadu Tamboskar11

It was held that section 6 gives an indication that pecuniary jurisdiction of a court is
determined by value of subject matter of the suit and section 15 corroborates this view by
postulating that the suit shall be instituted in the court of lowest grade.

COURTS TO TRY All CIVIL SUITS UNLESS BARRED

Section (9)
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.

Explation I – A suit in which the right to property or to an office is contested is a suit of a

civil nature, notwithstanding that such right may depend entirely on the decision of questions
as to religious rites or ceremonies.

Explanation II For the purpose of this section, it is immaterial whether or not any fees are
attached to the office referred to in Explanation I or whether or no such office is attached to a
particular place”.12

It may be seen that this section confers jurisdiction to the civil courts to try all suits excepting
those which are expressly or impliedly barred. This gives rise to the presumption that the
civil courts are competent to decide all civil matters unless their jurisdiction is barred or
excluded. 13

Two Things are essential to give jurisdiction:

(a) The suit must be of a civil nature , and

(b) Its cognizance must not be expressly or impliedly barred by any other law.

(i) The Suit of civil Nature

Suit of civil nature relates to the determination of civil right and enforcement .
It is not the status of the parties to the suit, but the subject matter of it which
determines whether or not the suit is of civil nature.

11
AIR 1989 Bom. 303.
12
Bare act ,code of civil procedure, 1908,2018
13
D.N. Mathur ,The Code of Civil Procedure , 1908, Central Law Publication , 3rd edition 2017, page no 101

11
 ‘Suit of Civil Nature’ cover private rights and obligations of a citizen. Political and
Religious questions are not covered by the expression. A suit in which the principal
questions relates to caste or religion is not a suit of civil nature. But if the principle
question in a suit is of civil nature ( the right to property or to an office)and the
adjudication incidentally involves the determination relating a caste question or religious
rights and ceremonies, it does not cease to be a suit of civil nature and the jurisdiction of
a court is no barred .
The court has jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the questions to decide the principal
question which is of civil nature.

 The suit of Civil Nature :

(i) Right to property
(ii) Right to worship
(iii) Suits relating to taking out of religious processions
(iv) Suits relating to right to shares in offerings
(v) Suits for damages for civil wrongs
(vi) Suits for specific performance of contracts or for damages for breaches of
contracts
(vii) Suits for specific reliefs
(viii) Suits for restitution of conjugal rights
(ix) Suits for dissolution of marriages
(x) Suits for rents
(xi) Suits for accounts
(xii) Suits for rights of franchise
(xiii) Suits for rights to hereditary offices
(xiv) Suits for rights to Yajman vritis
(xv) Suits against wrongful dismissal from service and for salaries , etc
(xvi) Suits not of civil nature

Suits not of Civil Nature

(i) Suits involving principally caste questions
(ii) Suits involving purely religious rites or ceremonies
(iii) Suits for upholding mere dignity or honour
(iv) Suits for recovery of voluntary payments or offspring’s
(v) Suits against expulsions from state, etc.14

14
Supra note 6 at page 52

12
 (B)Cognizance Not Barred
(i) Suits expressly barred – A suit is said to be “expressly
barred” when it is barred by an enactment for the time being in force. It is open to
a particular class of suits of a civil nature, provided that, in doing so, it keeps
itself within the field of legislation conferred on it and does not contravene any
provision of the constitution.15

(ii) Suits impliedly barred – A suit is said to be impliedly barred when it is

barred by general principles of law.

Case Dwarka Prasad Agarwala v. Ramesh Chandra Agarwala

It was held that Section 9 gives jurisdiction to try all suits of civil nature excepting those
which are expressly or impliedly barred by any other law.16

Presumption as to existence of jurisdiction : All civil courts are of general

jurisdiction that is to say that they can try all suits , which involve the
determination of any civil right . There is a strong presumption that civil
courts have jurisdiction to decide all questions to hear, try and decide that
suit, the burden of proof to show that jurisdiction is excluded, lies on that
party. 17

Case Rajsthan State road transport corporation v. Bal Mukund Bairva

There is a presumption that a civil court will have jurisdiction and the ouster of
civil court’s jurisdiction is not to be readily inferred. A person taking a contra plea
must establish the same.

15
Supra note 6 at page 52 para 2
16
ibid
17
ibid

13
 Exclusion of jurisdiction: The legislation grants jurisdiction to a court .
The legislature is also competent to curtail the jurisdiction of civil court
and confer it up on any other tribunal or Authority. When the Legislature
revokes the jurisdiction of a civil court, the result is that the civil court
cannot hear and try the disputes relating to that subject matter anymore.
This is called exclusion of jurisdiction or ouster of jurisdiction.18
8) Exclusion of Jurisdiction of Civil Courts:
From the above discussion , it is clear that the jurisdiction of civil courts is all – embracing
except to the extent it is excluded by law or by clear intendment arising from such law.

Case Dhulabhai vs State of M.P.19

After considering a number of cases , Hidayatullah, C.J. Summarized the following principles
relating to the exclusion of jurisdiction of civil courts.

1) Where a statue gives finality to orders of special tribunals, the civil courts jurisdiction
must be held to be excluded if there is adequate remedy to do what the civil courts
normally do in a suit.
2) Where there is an express bar of jurisdiction of a court, an examination of the scheme of a
particular Act to find the adequacy or sufficiency of remedies provided may be relevant
but this is not decisive for sustaining the jurisdiction of a civil court.
3) Challenge to the provisions of a particular Act as Ultra Vires cannot be brought before
tribunals constituted under that Act.
4) When a provision is already declared unconstitutional or the constitutionality of any
provision is to be challenged, suit is open.
5) Where the particular Act contains no machiary for refund of tax collected in excess of
constitutional limits or is illegally collected, a suit lies.
6) Questions of correctness of an assessment, apart from its constitusnality, are for the
decision of the authorities and a civil suit does not lie if the orders of the authorities are
declared to be final or there is an express prohibition in a particular Act.
7) An exclusion of jurisdiction of a civil court is not readily to be inferred unless the
conditions above set down apply.

18
ibid
19
AIR 1969 SC 78 :(1968)3 SCR 662.

14
 General Principles
1) A Civil court has jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature unless their cognizance is
barred either expressly or impliedly.
2) Consent can neither confer nor take away the jurisdiction of a court.
3) A decree passed by a court without jurisdiction is nullity and the validity there of can be
challenged at any stage of the proceedings.
4) There is a distinction between want of jurisdiction and irregular exercise thereof.
5) Every court has inherent power to decide the question of its own jurisdiction.
6) Jurisdiction of a court depends upon the averments made in a plaint and not upon the
defense in a written statement.
7) For deciding jurisdiction of a court, the substance of a matter and not form is important.
8) Every presumption should be made favor of jurisdiction of a civil court.
9) A statute ousting jurisdiction of a court must be strictly construed.
10) 20
Burden of proof of exclusion of jurisdiction of a court is on a party who
asserts it.
11) Even where jurisdiction of a civil court is barred, it can still decide whether the
provisions of an Act have been compiled with whether an order was passed decors the
provision of law.

20
C.K Takwani ,The Code of Civil Procedure , 1908, EBC , 8th edition 2017, page no - 60

15
 Conclusion

The word “jurisdiction of court” means the authority of a court to entertain, try and determine a
cause The. The Jurisdiction of the court is decisive factor in ascertaining the appropriate forum
for institution of suits. A suit must be filed before a court which is vested with the power to
entertain and try it. Selection of wrong forum may be fatal to the suit.

The jurisdiction of civil courts is of various kinds such as Territorial Jurisdiction, Pecuniary
jurisdiction, Jurisdiction as to subject matter, Original and Appellate Jurisdiction beyond which
the court cannot exceed its jurisdiction. If a court is vested with the power or authority to try and
adjudicate upon a cause, it is said to have jurisdiction over the matter”. A suit is not maintainable
in a court which is not vested with the jurisdiction to try the subject matter of a suit. Thus a
decree passed by a court without jurisdiction is void. The question whether the court before
which a suit has been filed , has or does not have a jurisdiction to entertain, try and decide it,
shall be determined by the same court. Jurisdiction is a strong ground of defence. By questioning
the jurisdiction, the very maintainability of the suit is attacked by the defendant. However, any
objection as to the jurisdiction must be taken by the defendant at the earliest available
opportunity.

While deciding the question of jurisdiction, the court proceeds with a presumption that the
jurisdiction exists. The burden of proof to show that the jurisdiction is on the party questioning
it.

Lastly bar on jurisdiction could be either expressed or implied. A bar is said to be express if
Legislation place embargo in express terms. It is said to be implied if a statute creates a special
right or liability, constitutes special tribunals for the determination . The suit shall be instituted
in the court of lowest grade competent to try it (sec15).

16
Bibliography :
 Mulla, The code of Civil Procedure, 3 Volumes , Lexis- Nexis butterworth- wdhawa,
(2011)

 CK Takwani, Code of Civil Procedure, 6 Volumes, EBC(2011)

 D.N. Mathur , the code of civil procedure, Central Law Publications.

 https://www.wikipedia.org

17