Suits of Civil Nature: Section 9 Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC), which is fundamental to understanding the jurisdiction of civil courts in India.
Section 9: Courts to try all civil suits unless barred.
"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."
Understanding Section 9
Section 9 is a pivotal provision because it defines the scope of jurisdiction of civil courts. It essentially lays down a presumption: all disputes of a civil nature are triable by a civil court, unless their jurisdiction is specifically excluded.
Let's dissect the key phrases:Section 9 CPC: Courts to Try All Civil Suits
Text of Section 9:
“Subject to the provisions of this Code, the Courts shall have jurisdiction to try all civil suits excepting suits of which their cognizance is expressly or impliedly barred.”
Meaning of Section 9
Civil Suit: A civil suit is a legal proceeding between private parties or between private parties and the state in non-criminal matters.
Suits of Civil Nature: Section 9 recognizes that courts have general jurisdiction to try all civil matters, unless specifically barred.
It is a primary source of judicial authority for civil courts in India.
Essentials of Section 9
Nature of Suit:
The dispute must be of a civil nature.
Civil suits typically involve:
Property disputes
Contracts and agreements
Family law matters (divorce, maintenance)
Torts (negligence, defamation)
Recovery of money
Jurisdiction of Civil Courts:
Section 9 confers general jurisdiction to civil courts to try all civil suits.
Courts cannot refuse to try civil suits unless barred by statute (e.g., Companies Act, Income Tax Act).
Exclusion by Statute:
Certain statutes provide exclusive forums for disputes, barring ordinary civil courts:
Income Tax disputes → Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
Labour disputes → Labour Courts
Company disputes → Company Law Tribunal
What is a “Civil Suit”?
A civil suit is a legal action where the plaintiff seeks remedy for a private wrong or enforcement of a private right.
Not all disputes are civil; criminal matters (e.g., theft, murder) are outside Section 9.
Landmark Cases Interpreting Section 9
Lallu Yeshwant Singh v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1966):
Explained that civil courts cannot entertain suits barred by specific statutory provisions.
K.K. Verma v. Union of India (1980):
Emphasized that Section 9 is very wide, allowing civil courts to try all civil suits unless explicitly barred by law.
K.C. Thomas v. Union of India (1990):
Clarified that disputes arising from private rights and obligations are inherently civil in nature.
Significance of Section 9 CPC
General Jurisdiction:
Empowers civil courts to hear almost all private law disputes.
Flexibility:
Courts can adjudicate disputes unless a statute expressly bars them.
Foundation of Civil Adjudication:
Section 9 acts as the backbone of civil court jurisdiction in India.
Encourages Access to Justice:
Ensures that parties have a forum to resolve private disputes.
Illustrative Example
Civil Suit under Section 9:
A disputes a contract with B for the sale of goods → Files a civil suit in district court for breach of contract.
Court has jurisdiction under Section 9.
Not a Civil Suit:
A accuses B of theft → This is a criminal matter; Section 9 does not apply.
Summary Table
| Element | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Scope | All civil suits, unless barred by statute |
| Nature of Suits | Property, contracts, family law, torts, recovery of money |
| Barred Suits | Suits where a statute provides exclusive jurisdiction |
| Purpose | Provides general jurisdiction to civil courts for private disputes |
1. "The Courts shall...have jurisdiction to try..."
This establishes the general rule: Civil Courts are vested with wide powers to hear and decide cases. The word "shall" indicates a mandate; civil courts are obliged to entertain and decide all suits of a civil nature, unless specifically prohibited.
This also implies that the burden of proving that a suit is not of a civil nature, or that its cognizance is barred, lies on the party asserting such a bar.
2. "...all Suits of a civil nature..."
This is the most crucial part. What constitutes a "suit of a civil nature"?
"Civil" vs. "Political/Religious/Criminal": The term "civil nature" generally refers to disputes relating to private rights and obligations. It distinguishes them from:
Political Suits: Matters purely concerning political questions or state policy.
Religious Suits (with a caveat): Disputes that are purely about religious rites, ceremonies, or dogmas are generally not considered of a civil nature. However, if the dispute involves civil rights, such as the right to worship in a particular place, the right to an office in a religious institution, or rights related to property attached to a religious institution, then it becomes a "suit of a civil nature." The key is whether a civil right is intertwined with the religious aspect.
Criminal Suits: Matters relating to offenses punishable under criminal law.
Examples of Suits of a Civil Nature (Illustrative, not exhaustive):
Suits relating to property rights (ownership, possession, mortgage, easements, partition).
Suits relating to contractual rights (breach of contract, specific performance).
Suits for damages for torts (e.g., defamation, negligence).
Suits for injunctions.
Suits for declarations of status (e.g., validity of marriage, legitimacy).
Suits for rendition of accounts.
Suits for recovery of money.
Suits for dissolution of partnership.
Right to vote, right to an office, right to dignity/reputation (if pecuniary or social damage is involved).
Key Test: The Supreme Court has clarified that the "right to property or to an office" is a suit of a civil nature. It is not the origin of the right (e.g., religious) but whether the enforcement of that right is for a civil purpose that determines the civil nature of the suit. If the principal question is the management of a religious institution or the right to property or office connected with it, it is a civil suit.
3. "...excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred."
This part sets out the exceptions to the general rule, specifying when a civil court's jurisdiction is ousted.
Expressly Barred: This occurs when a specific statute or law explicitly states that a particular type of suit cannot be tried by a civil court. The statute usually provides an alternative forum or mechanism for redressal.
Examples:
Revenue matters: Many land revenue codes or tenancy laws bar civil courts from adjudicating certain types of disputes, vesting jurisdiction in revenue courts or tribunals.
Labour disputes: The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, typically vests jurisdiction in Labour Courts and Industrial Tribunals for industrial disputes.
Taxation matters: Appeals against tax assessments are often handled by specialized tribunals (e.g., Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GST Appellate Tribunal).
Election disputes: Article 329 of the Constitution bars civil courts from interfering in election matters once the election process has commenced.
Impliedly Barred: This arises when the intention to exclude the jurisdiction of civil courts can be inferred from the scheme of a particular Act, even if there's no explicit bar. This usually happens when:
Specialized Tribunal/Authority: A statute creates a special tribunal or authority and endows it with exclusive jurisdiction to deal with certain matters, and the procedure and remedies provided by that special forum are exhaustive.
Public Policy: Where the subject matter of the suit is such that allowing civil courts to interfere would be contrary to public policy or the legislative intent.
Examples:
Service matters of government employees: While there are exceptions, many service-related disputes fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of Administrative Tribunals.
Disputes related to certain electoral processes (beyond what is expressly barred).
Matters related to purely internal discipline of certain organizations (e.g., military, universities), if a clear and effective alternative redressal mechanism is provided.
Important Considerations Regarding Bar to Jurisdiction:
Strict Construction: Courts generally adopt a strict construction when interpreting statutes that purport to oust the jurisdiction of civil courts. This means that unless the exclusion is clear and unambiguous, civil court jurisdiction will be presumed.
Adequacy of Alternative Remedy: Even if a statute creates an alternative forum, the Supreme Court has held that the civil court's jurisdiction is not completely barred if the special tribunal or authority acts ultra vires (beyond its powers), commits a fraud, or violates principles of natural justice. In such exceptional cases, a civil suit challenging the tribunal's order might still be maintainable.
Ouster of Jurisdiction is Not Lightly Inferred: The civil court has inherent jurisdiction to decide if its jurisdiction is barred.
Conclusion
Section 9 of the CPC is the bedrock of civil litigation in India. It establishes the principle of plenitude of jurisdiction for civil courts, meaning they have the power to try all civil matters. The exceptions to this rule, where jurisdiction is expressly or impliedly barred, are narrowly construed, emphasizing the importance of access to justice through ordinary civil courts as the primary forum for resolving disputes concerning civil rights.
RELATED Blog
0 comments