Case Note & Summary
The case involves a second appeal filed by the original plaintiffs (appellants) against the judgment and decree of the appellate court which dismissed their suit for want of jurisdiction. The appellants had filed a suit for declaration and injunction in respect of certain premises. The respondent/defendant claimed that the Civil Court lacked jurisdiction because the suit premises had been completed prior to the filing of the suit, bringing it under the purview of the Goa, Daman and Diu Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1968. However, this fact was not pleaded in the written statement. The trial court decreed the suit, but the appellate court reversed the decision, holding that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction. The High Court admitted the second appeal on two substantial questions of law: (1) whether the appellate court's finding that pleadings are not material for deciding jurisdiction is legal and valid, and (2) whether the courts below were justified in permitting the defendant to lead evidence on an unpleaded point and considering it to non-suit the plaintiffs. The High Court held that the appellate court's approach was erroneous. It emphasized that jurisdiction must be determined based on the pleadings, and the court cannot oust its jurisdiction on facts not pleaded. The court also held that permitting evidence on unpleaded facts and using it to dismiss the suit was not justified. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the appellate court's judgment, and restored the trial court's decree.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Jurisdiction of Civil Court - Ouster of Jurisdiction - Pleadings - The appellate court's finding that pleadings are not material for deciding jurisdiction is erroneous; jurisdiction must be determined based on pleadings and the court cannot suo motu oust jurisdiction on unpleaded facts. (Paras 2-3) B) Evidence Act - Leading Evidence Beyond Pleadings - Courts below were not justified in permitting the defendant to lead evidence on a point not pleaded in the written statement, and considering such evidence to non-suit the plaintiffs on the ground that the Civil Court lacks jurisdiction. (Paras 2-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the findings of the appellate court that for deciding jurisdiction of the Civil Court to entertain the suit, pleadings of the parties are not material and that the Court can decide upon the jurisdiction in the absence of any pleadings, be said to be legal and valid especially in view of the fact that the defendant/respondent's claim for ouster of Civil Court's jurisdiction was based on the alleged fact that the suit premises had completed much prior to the filing of the suit and this fact was not pleaded in the written statement?
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and decree of the appellate court, and restored the judgment and decree of the trial court.
Law Points
- Jurisdiction of civil court
- ouster of jurisdiction
- pleadings
- evidence beyond pleadings
- substantial question of law
- second appeal
