Bombay High Court Holds It Lacks Jurisdiction to Decide Amendment Application in Suit Slated for Transfer Due to Loss of Pecuniary Jurisdiction. The Court cannot retain jurisdiction to decide an amendment application seeking to increase suit valuation after the Bombay City Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2023 came into force, as the suit already falls within the enhanced pecuniary jurisdiction of the City Civil Court.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 3
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The Bombay High Court was tasked with deciding whether it retains jurisdiction to entertain an application for amendment of plaint seeking to increase the suit valuation, after the Bombay City Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2023 came into force on 28 January 2024, which raised the pecuniary jurisdiction of the City Civil Court from Rs.5 lakhs to Rs.10 Crores. The suit, originally filed in 2002, was valued at Rs.6,75,00,000/- and thus fell within the enhanced jurisdiction of the City Civil Court. The plaintiffs filed an interim application on 5 February 2024 seeking to amend the plaint to increase the valuation to Rs.100 Crores, arguing that if allowed, the suit would again fall within the High Court's jurisdiction. The defendants opposed, contending that the High Court had lost jurisdiction to decide any application after the Amendment Act came into force. The Court analyzed Section 4A of the Bombay City Civil Court Act, 1948, as amended, which provides for transfer of all suits pending in the High Court that fall within the City Civil Court's pecuniary jurisdiction. The Court held that the Amendment Act, 2023 is a complete code for transfer and does not permit the High Court to retain jurisdiction to decide applications after the cut-off date. The Court distinguished the Full Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court relied upon by the plaintiffs, noting that the Delhi High Court's ruling was based on different statutory provisions. The Court concluded that it had no jurisdiction to decide the amendment application and directed the registry to transmit the suit records to the City Civil Court for further proceedings. The Court also noted that the plaintiffs could seek amendment before the City Civil Court.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Pecuniary Jurisdiction - Amendment of Plaint - Bombay City Civil Court Act, 1948, Section 4A - The Court held that once the pecuniary jurisdiction is lost due to an amendment increasing the City Civil Court's limit, the High Court cannot decide an amendment application seeking to increase suit valuation, as the suit must be transferred. The Full Bench judgment of Delhi High Court was distinguished. (Paras 1-2)

B) Civil Procedure - Transfer of Suits - Retention of Jurisdiction - Bombay City Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2023 - The Court held that the Amendment Act, 2023 mandates transfer of all suits valued up to Rs.10 Crores pending in the High Court to the City Civil Court, and the High Court cannot retain jurisdiction to decide any application, including amendment, after the cut-off date. (Paras 2-3)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether this Court has jurisdiction to decide an application for amendment of plaint seeking to increase the valuation of the suit, after the Court has lost pecuniary jurisdiction due to the Bombay City Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2023, which increased the pecuniary jurisdiction of the City Civil Court to Rs.10 Crores and provides for transfer of pending suits.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The High Court held that it has no jurisdiction to decide the amendment application. The registry is directed to transmit the suit records to the City Civil Court for further proceedings. The plaintiffs are at liberty to seek amendment before the City Civil Court.

Law Points

  • Pecuniary jurisdiction
  • Amendment of plaint
  • Transfer of suits
  • Retention of jurisdiction
  • Bombay City Civil Court Act
  • 1948
  • Section 4A
  • Bombay City Civil Court (Amendment) Act
  • 2023
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2024 LawText (BOM) (02) 185

Interim Application (L) No. 4009 of 2024 in Suit No. 99 of 2002

2024-02-23

Sandeep V. Marne J.

2024:BHC-OS:2929

Mr. Navroz Seervai, Senior Advocate a/w Ms. Lizom Wangdi, Ms. Bindi Dave, Mr. Raghav Gupta, Mr. Kashish Mainkar & Ms. Sanyukta Karne i/b Wadia Ghandy & Co., for Plaintiffs & for Defendant in S/176/2002. Mr. Janak Dwarkadas, Senior Advocate and Mr. Vineet Naik, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Rahul Dwarkadas, Ms. Sukhada Wagle, Nutash Kotwal i/b Veritas Legal, for Plaintiff in S/176/2022 and for Defendant No.1 in S/99/2002. Mr. Cyrus Ardeshir, a/w Ms. Radhika Gupta & Saher Naqvi i/b Khaitan & Co., for Respondent in IAL/4009/2024.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Interim application for amendment of plaint in a suit pending in the High Court, where the suit's valuation falls within the enhanced pecuniary jurisdiction of the City Civil Court due to the Bombay City Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2023.

Remedy Sought

Plaintiffs seek amendment of the plaint to increase the suit valuation from Rs.6,75,00,000/- to Rs.100 Crores, so that the suit remains within the High Court's jurisdiction.

Filing Reason

The Bombay City Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2023 increased the pecuniary jurisdiction of the City Civil Court to Rs.10 Crores, and the suit valued at Rs.6,75,00,000/- falls within that jurisdiction, necessitating transfer. Plaintiffs seek to avoid transfer by amending the valuation.

Issues

Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to decide an application for amendment of plaint seeking to increase suit valuation after the Bombay City Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2023 came into force, which mandates transfer of suits valued up to Rs.10 Crores to the City Civil Court.

Submissions/Arguments

Plaintiffs argued that since the proposed amendment would increase the suit valuation to Rs.100 Crores, which is above the City Civil Court's pecuniary limit, the High Court retains jurisdiction to decide the amendment application. Defendants contended that the High Court lost jurisdiction to decide any application after the Amendment Act, 2023 came into force, and the suit must be transferred to the City Civil Court.

Ratio Decidendi

The Bombay City Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2023 is a complete code for transfer of suits. Once the pecuniary jurisdiction of the High Court is lost due to the amendment, the High Court cannot retain jurisdiction to decide any application, including an amendment application, after the cut-off date. The suit must be transferred to the City Civil Court, which can decide the amendment application.

Judgment Excerpts

Jurisdiction of this Court to decide application for amendment seeking to increase the valuation of suit over which this Court has already lost pecuniary jurisdiction is the issue that I am tasked upon to decide. Owing to loss of pecuniary jurisdiction coupled with a provision for transfer of pending suits to the City Civil Court, a simple order for transmission of papers in the Suit to City Civil Court could have been passed in the present Suit ordinary course.

Procedural History

The suit was filed in 2002 in the Bombay High Court. On 28 January 2024, the Bombay City Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2023 came into force, increasing the pecuniary jurisdiction of the City Civil Court to Rs.10 Crores. The plaintiffs filed an interim application on 5 February 2024 seeking amendment of the plaint to increase the suit valuation. The court heard arguments and reserved judgment on 16 February 2024, pronouncing it on 23 February 2024.

Acts & Sections

  • Bombay City Civil Court Act, 1948: Section 4A
  • Bombay City Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2023:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Interim Custody of Seized Cattle to Claimed Owners in Animal Cruelty Case — Courts Below Erred in Rejecting Custody Without Considering Conditional Release. Pending trial under Section 11(1)(d) of Prevention of Cruelty to A...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Acquits Three Appellants in Murder Case Due to Inconsistent Application of Section 34 IPC and Unlawful Assembly Provisions. The court held that conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC was unsustainable when the prosecu...