Civil revision application challenging an order rejecting an application for a preliminary issue on pecuniary jurisdiction under Section 9A CPC. The Court held Section 9A is repealed and dismissed the revision.
Application under Section 9A CPC rendered non-maintainable; Civil Revision Application dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.510 OF 2003
Yashwant Kashinath Patil .. Applicant
versus
Shankat Ganpat Patil & ors. .. Respondents
Ms.Gauri Godse for the applicant.
CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J
DATED : 13th April 2007.
P.C.:
1. This Revision Application is directed
against the order dated 4th September 2003 passed by
the learned Joint Civil Judge, Jr. Division, Alibag
rejecting the revision applicant’s application
(Exhibit-96).
2. The respondent nos.1 to 3 filed a suit
against the revision applicant and respondent nos.4
to 40 in the Court of Civil Judge, Jr.Division for a
declaration and injunction. In the said suit, the
revision applicant made an application at Exhibit-96
on 20th March 2003 for framing and hearing a
preliminary issue as to the jurisdiction of court.
Therein he contended that the Court of Civil Judge,
Jr. Division, Alibag had no jurisdiction to
entertain and try the suit as the suit was beyond the
pecuniary jurisdiction in the court. He prayed that
the issue regarding the jurisdiction be framed and
tried as a preliminary issue under section 9A of the
Code of Civil Procedure.
3. Section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure
was introduced to which Code of Civil Procedure by
the legislature of Maharashtra and required the Court
to frame and decide an issue regarding the
jurisdiction as a preliminary issue. In Solapur
Social Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Nigam A.
Mannan Beskar & ors. reported in 2006(4) Bom.C.R.
217, I have held that section 9A of the Code of Civil
Procedure stands repealed by reason of the Code of
Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act 1999 Central Act 46
of 1999 and the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment)
Act, 2002 (Central Act 22 of 2002).
4. As the Maharashtra Amendment introducing
section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure itself
stood repealed, application under section 9A of the
C.P.C itself was not maintainable. In the
circumstances, there is no merit in the Revision
Application which is accordingly dismissed.
(D.G. KARNIK, J)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a revision application under Section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure is maintainable when the section has been repealed.
Whether the impugned order rejecting the preliminary issue regarding pecuniary jurisdiction can be sustained post-repeal.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Solapur Social Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Nigam A. Mannan Beskar & orsRelied on¶6
2006(4) Bom.C.R. 217 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Yashwant Kashinath Patil
Shankat Ganpat Patil
D.G. Karnik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court