Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2015 (4) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (4) TMI 1230 - SC - Indian LawsAmbit and scope of Section 9A CPC as inserted by the Code of Civil Procedure (Maharashtra Amendment) Act 1977 - Time limitation - binding precedents - whether an issue relating to a bar to the suit created by law of limitation can be tried as preliminary issue under Section 9A of the Code? Held that: - Section 9A of the Maharashtra Amendment Act is a complete departure from the procedure provided under Order XIV Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Notwithstanding the inconsistency contained in the Act of the Parliament viz., the Code of Civil Procedure and the provisions contained in Section 9A of the State Act, having regard to the fact that the assent of the President was received, the provisions of the said Section has to be complied with and can be held to be a valid legislation. It is evident that the practice followed in the City Civil Court in filing the suits against the Government without giving notice under Section 80 of the CPC and after the interim relief continued the plaintiff takes permission to withdraw the suit and to file a fresh suit. As a matter of fact, the legislature intended to stop this abuse of process by introducing Section 9A in the CPC by Maharashtra amendment Act. By reason of such amendment the Court is now required to decide the issue of jurisdiction at the time of granting the relief or considering the application for vacating the interim relief. It is well settled that essentially the jurisdiction is an authority to decide a given case one way or the other. Further, even though no party has raised objection with regard to jurisdiction of the court, the court has power to determine its own jurisdiction - in a case where the Court has no jurisdiction; it cannot confer upon it by consent or waiver of the parties. The provision of Section 9A as introduced by (Maharahtra Amendment) Act is mandatory in nature. It is a complete departure from the provisions of Order XIV, Rule 2, C.P.C. Appeal dismissed.
|