Objections To Jurisdiction
Sec 21 of CPC, 1908
(1) No objection as to the place of suing shall be allowed by any Appellate or Revisional Court unless such objection was taken in the Court of first instance at the earliest possible opportunity and in all cases where issues or settled at or before such settlement, and unless there has been a consequent failure of justice.
(2) No objection as to the competence of a Court with reference to the pecuniary limits of its jurisdiction shall be allowed by any Appellate or Revisional Court unless such objection was taken in the Court of first instance at the earliest possible opportunity, and in all cases where issues are settled, at or before such settlement, and unless there has been a consequent failure of justice.
(3) No objection as to the competence of the executing Court with reference to the local limits of its jurisdiction shall be allowed by any Appellate or Revisional Court unless such objection was taken in the executing Court at the earliest possible opportunity, and unless there has been a consequent failure of justice.
Objections To Jurisdiction
Summary of Sec 21 CPC, 1908
Objections To Jurisdiction
Confusion ???
Every Court or tribunal is subject to various jurisdictions such as territorial jurisdiction, original jurisdiction, pecuniary jurisdiction , appellate jurisdiction etc.. Without jurisdiction a Court or tribunal cannot try any suit or prtition otherwise the decree and judgement passed by the court or the order passed by the tribunal would be a nullity.
In Kiran Singh v. Chaman Paswan AIR -1954 Supreme Court Held that It is a fundamental principle well established that a decree passed by a Court without jurisdiction is a nullity, and that its invalidity could be set up whenever and wherever it is sought to be enforced or relied upon, even at the stage of execution and even in collateral proceedings. A defect of jurisdiction, whether it is pecuniary or territorial, or whether it is in respect of the subject-matter of the action, strikes at the very authority of the Court to pass any decree, and such a defect cannot be cured even by consent of parties.
In Kiran Singh v. Chaman Paswan AIR -1954 Supreme Court Held that It is a fundamental principle well established that a decree passed by a Court without jurisdiction is a nullity, and that its invalidity could be set up whenever and wherever it is sought to be enforced or relied upon, even at the stage of execution and even in collateral proceedings. A defect of jurisdiction, whether it is pecuniary or territorial, or whether it is in respect of the subject-matter of the action, strikes at the very authority of the Court to pass any decree, and such a defect cannot be cured even by consent of parties.
-
Section 11 in The Suits Valuation Act, 1887
-
Section 99 in The Civil Procedure Code , 1908
Section 11 in The Suits Valuation Act, 1887
11. Procedure where objection is taken on appeal on revision that a suit or appeal was not properly valued for jurisdictional purposes.—(1)Notwithstanding anything in section 578 of the Code of Civil Procedure (14 of 1882), an objection that by reason of the over-valuation or under-valuation of a suit or appeal a Court of first instance or lower Appellate Court which had no jurisdiction with respect to the suit or appeal exercise jurisdiction with respect thereto shall not be entertained by an Appellate Court unless—(a)the objection was taken in the Court of first instance at or before the hearing at which issues were first framed and recorded, or in the lower Appellate Court in the memorandum of appeal to that Court, or
(b) the Appellate Court is satisfied, for reasons to be recorded by it in writing, that the suit or appeal was over-valued or under-valued, and that the over-valuation or under-valuation thereof has prejudicially affected the disposal of the suit or appeal on its merits.
(2) If the objection was taken in the manner mentioned in clause (a) of sub-section (1), but the Appellate Court is not satisfied as to both the matters mentioned in clause (b) of that sub-section and has before it the materials necessary for the determination of the other grounds of appeal to itself, it shall dispose of the appeals as if there had been no defect of jurisdiction in the Court of first instance or lower Appellate Court.
(3) If the objection was taken in that manner and the Appellate Court is satisfied as to both those matters and has not those materials before it, it shall proceed to deal with the appeal under the rules applicable to the Court with respect to the hearing of appeals; but if it remands the suit or appeal, or frames and refers issues for trial, or requires additional evidence to be taken, it shall direct its order to a Court competent to entertain the suit or appeal.
(4) The provisions of the section with respect to an Appellate Court shall, so far as they can be made applicable, apply to a Court exercising revisional jurisdiction under 10 section 622 of the Code of Civil Procedure (14 of 1882) or other enactment for the time being in force.
Section 99 in Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
No decree shall be reversed or “substantially varied, nor shall any case be remanded in appeal on account of any mis joinder 1[or non-joinder] of parties or causes of action or any error, defect or irregularity in any proceedings in the suit, not affecting the merits of the case or the jurisdiction of the Court.
1[Provided that nothing in this section shall apply to non-joinder of a necessary party.]
1. Ins. by Act. No. 104 of 1976, sec. 35 (w.e.f. 1-2-1977).
Over – All Effect
Objections Can only be raised at Appellate or Revisional Court when two necessary elements are present.
- Must raise the objection in the Trial Court at earliest possible opportunity.
- Due to lack of jurisdiction in terms of Territorial Or Pecuniary Jurisdiction , there is consequent failure of justice
Over – All Effect – Exception
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mantoo Sarkar vs Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. (2008) held that — A distinction, however, must be made between a jurisdiction with regard to subject matter of the suit and that of territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction. Whereas in the case falling within the former category the judgment would be a nullity, in the latter it would not be. It is not a case where the Tribunal had no jurisdiction in relation to the subject matter of claim.
The Scope of Section – 21 includes the Court with lack of Territorial /Pecuniary Jurisdiction but not court which no jurisdiction in terms of subject – matter . So objection can be raise at any stage even in the absent of two essential elements.
FAILURE OF RAISING OBJECTIONS ON TIME
Where the party fails to raise an objection to the territorial jurisdiction on time then it will deemed to have been waived such a right and the decision of the court will be Res Judicata by virtue of section 11 of C.P.C.
The Scope of Section – 21 includes the Court with lack of Territorial /Pecuniary Jurisdiction but not court which no jurisdiction in terms of subject – matter . So objection can be raise at any stage even in the absent of two essential elements.
No comment