Which court do we institute a suit in when the suit is for an immovable property situate within the jurisdiction of different courts?

 

When a suit is to be instituted by the plaintiff, he shall institute it through a plaint, as per the Code of civil procedure, 1908, every court has a jurisdiction to entertain a specific types of cases, and as per the jurisdiction of the court, the plaintiff has to institute his case. There are broadly three types of jurisdiction 1) Subject matter, 2) Territorial, and 3) Pecuniary.

 

Subject Matter: The court’s jurisdiction to hear a particular type of case, such as civil, criminal and matrimonial, traffic rules violation, railway accident claims, etc. If the court is authorized to only adjudicate on criminal matters, then one cannot file a civil suit before such a court.

Territorial: The geographical boundaries within which the court is authorised to adjudicate the case. If the court is authorized to only adjudicate upon matters falling within the geographical limits of Mumbai, then one cannot file a case which falls within the geographical limits of Delhi.

Pecuniary: The monetary limits as to which the courts can adjudicate upon the case. The money raised in the plaint shall be within the pecuniary limits of the court. If the court is authorised to adjudicate upon matters falling within Rs. 10 lakhs, then such a court cannot adjudicate upon a civil suit in which the reliefs claimed go beyond Rs. 10 lakhs.

In the case where suit can be instituted in more than one court, then the court of the lowest grade is competent to try it – Section 15 of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Suit for immovable property situate within the jurisdiction of different courts.

When the plaintiff wants to institute a suit and the reliefs claimed are for respecting or compensation for wrong to, immovable property situate within the Jurisdiction of “different” courts, in this case, the suit may be instituted in “Any” court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction any portion of the property is situate.

Here the situation is so that court A and court B both are on the same grade, both the courts have the subject matter, territorial and peculinary jurisdiction over the immovable property and are also otherwise competent to try the suit, in this case the plaintiff is at the liberty to choose as to which court he wants to institute his suit, he may institute the suit in court A or court B – Section 17 of The Code of Civil Procedure,1908.

Difference between section 17 and section 18 of The Code of Civil Procedure,1908.

Section 17 - Suits for immovable property situate within the jurisdiction of “different”  Courts.

Section 18 - Place of Institution of suit where local limits of jurisdiction of Courts are “uncertain”.

The fundamental difference between section 17 and section 18 is that under 17, the situation is so that more than one court has the jurisdiction to try the suit, and the plaintiff can institute the suit in any of the courts, as it is known that these courts have the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the suit. However, under section 18, the jurisdiction of the court is uncertain; it is a situation wherein there is genuine confusion as to which court has the jurisdiction to try the suit. There is “uncertainty” of the jurisdiction of the court, then any one of those Courts may, if satisfied that there is ground for the alleged uncertainty, record a statement to that effect and thereupon proceed to entertain and dispose of any suit relating to that property, and its decree in the suit shall have the same effect as if the property were situate within the local limits of its jurisdiction.

No objection as to the 1. place of suing and 2. competence of the court with reference to the pecuniary limits of its jurisdiction, shall be allowed by an Appellate or Revisional court unless:

1. Such objection was taken at the earliest possible opportunity and, in all cases where issues are settled, at or before such settlement before the court of "first instance," AND

2. There has been a consequent "failure of Justice."

- Section 21 of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

What is specifically required to be mentioned in the plaint when the subject matter is immovable property?

When the subject matter of the suit is “immovable property”, the plaint shall contain a Description of the property,  which has to be sufficient to identify the property, and in case such property can be identified by boundaries or numbers in a record of settlement, or survey, the plaint shall specify such boundaries or numbers. – Order 7, Rule 3 of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Only certain claims to be joined for recovery of immovable property.—No cause of action shall, unless with the leave of the Court, be joined with a suit for the recovery of immovable property,

except—

(a) claims for mesne profits or arrears of rent in respect of the property claimed or any part thereof;

(b) claims for damages for breach of any contract under which the property or any part thereof is

held; and

(c) claims in which the relief sought is based on the same cause of action:

Provided that nothing in this rule shall be deemed to prevent any party in a suit for foreclosure or redemption from asking to be put into possession of the mortgaged property. – Order III, Rule 4 of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

  Article only for the purpose of education.

References 

Indiacode