Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court considered a reference made by a Division Bench doubting the correctness of the decision in Foreshore Cooperative Housing Society Limited v. Praveen D. Desai (Dead) through Legal Representatives and others, (2015) 6 SCC 412, regarding the interpretation of Section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) as inserted by the Maharashtra Amendment Act, 1977. The core issue was whether the expression 'jurisdiction of the Court to entertain such suit' under Section 9A includes the issue of limitation. The court examined the Statement of Objects and Reasons for the introduction and re-enactment of Section 9A, which aimed to prevent abuse of interim relief by requiring courts to decide jurisdictional objections as preliminary issues. The court noted that the term 'jurisdiction' is used in a broad sense and is not restricted to pecuniary or territorial jurisdiction. It held that limitation goes to the root of the court's jurisdiction to entertain a suit, and therefore, the issue of limitation must be decided as a preliminary issue under Section 9A. The court also noted that the decision in Kamalakar Eknath Salunkhe v. Baburav Vishnu Javalkar, (2015) 7 SCC 321, which took a contrary view, was per incuriam in light of larger Bench decisions. The reference was made to resolve the divergence of views. The judgment provides a detailed analysis of the legislative history and purpose of Section 9A, emphasizing that the provision was intended to ensure that jurisdictional issues, including limitation, are decided at the earliest stage to prevent abuse of the legal process.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Section 9A CPC (Maharashtra Amendment) - Interpretation of 'Jurisdiction' - The expression 'jurisdiction of the Court to entertain such suit' under Section 9A includes the issue of limitation, as the term 'jurisdiction' is used in a broad sense and is not restricted to pecuniary or territorial jurisdiction. The court held that limitation goes to the root of the court's jurisdiction to entertain a suit. (Paras 1-10) B) Civil Procedure - Section 9A CPC (Maharashtra Amendment) - Preliminary Issue - Under Section 9A, if an objection to jurisdiction is taken at the hearing of an application for interim relief, the court must decide the issue of jurisdiction as a preliminary issue before granting or setting aside interim relief. The court held that this includes deciding the issue of limitation as a jurisdictional question. (Paras 3-6) C) Precedent - Foreshore Cooperative Housing Society v. Praveen D. Desai - Overruled - The decision in Foreshore Cooperative Housing Society Limited v. Praveen D. Desai (Dead) through Legal Representatives and others, (2015) 6 SCC 412, which held that limitation is not a jurisdictional issue under Section 9A, was doubted and referred to a larger Bench. The reference was made due to a divergence of views with Kamalakar Eknath Salunkhe v. Baburav Vishnu Javalkar, (2015) 7 SCC 321. (Paras 1-2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the expression 'jurisdiction of the Court to entertain such suit' under Section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Maharashtra Amendment) includes the issue of limitation.
Final Decision
The reference is made to a larger Bench to decide whether the expression 'jurisdiction' under Section 9A includes limitation. The judgment notes that the decision in Foreshore Cooperative Housing Society v. Praveen D. Desai is doubted and that Kamalakar Eknath Salunkhe v. Baburav Vishnu Javalkar is per incuriam.
Law Points
- Section 9A CPC
- jurisdiction includes limitation
- preliminary issue
- Maharashtra Amendment
- Foreshore Cooperative Housing Society v. Praveen D. Desai overruled
