A BASIC UNDERSTANDING ON PLACE OF SUING


A BASIC UNDERSTANDING ON PLACE OF SUING- With 5 essential work it out questions!

PROBLEM 1 : A residing at Alandar, has a property at Tarapur, B acquired the property by force and is in enjoyment of the same. B is residing at Rameshwar. Now !where can A institute the recovery suit against B ?

One may think!

  • It can be instituted at Rameshwar – place of defendant for convenient summoning of the defendant or

  • At place of Plaintiff – Alandar for personal convenience.

However as per sec: 16 – a suit for recovery on immovable property must be initiated only at place where property is situated – Inox Air Products Ltd v. Rathi Ispat Ltd ,AIR 2007 Delhi 53 , thus proper place of initiation is Tarapur.

PROBLEM 2. Now ! A is living at Tambaram , and has a property at Puzhal. B trespassed into the property and caused damage to it. B resides at Adayar. Where should A institute a suit for damages against B ?

Ans :- Here ! the suit can be initiated at the place of defendant – (B) - Adyar or at the place where property is situated- Puzhal.

Crux :- Work out 1 and 2 has the same subject matter ( immovable property ), however place of suing differ- Incase of 1 – suit cannot be initiated in place of defendant but in case 2 suit can be initiated there .

WHY? THINK !

Explanation:- as per proviso to sec 16 – if the relief is for compensation of wrong done to immovable property + relief sought can be obtained entirely through personal obedience of defendant – the plaintiff has a choice to sue him at his place.

PROBLEM 3. Property of A is seem to be situated partly in jurisdiction of X,Y and Z , further there is uncertainty as to whose local limits this property lies. In such a case where can A sue for bare injunction ?

Ans :- Court X, Y and Z has concurrent jurisdiction since the property partly situated in each courts’s jurisdiction- however – since there is uncertainty regarding whose local limits it lies – Sec- 18 -the court must record such uncertainty and proceed to dispose the suit accordingly .

If the court fails to record such uncertainty before disposing the suit , can it be agitated in appeal ?

Ans :- yes ! objection may be raised -but only when – at the time of institution suit there reasonable ground for uncertainty in jurisdiction + there has been sonsequent failure of justice.

PROBLEM 4 : A and B agreed to institute a suit in Bangalore ( competent place of jurisdiction) , but part of cause of action arouse in Chennai too. Now where can the suit be initiated?

Ans :- In lieu of the agreement between parties + both courts have jurisdiction – suit must be instituted at Bangalore alone ( agreed place )- Hatti Gold Mines Lts v. M/s Vinay Heavy Equipments, Shree Subhalaxmi Fabric Pvt Ltd v. Chand Mal Baradia, AIR 2005 SC 2161.

NOTE : DETAIL EXPLANATION ABOUT PLACE OF SUING ON FOUR HEADS - SUITS ON IMMOVABLE PROPERTY, MOVEABLE PROPERTY, COMPENSATION FOR WRONG AND OTHER SUITS – with comprehensive table is available in our notes.

Courses Offered

Recent Post

Achievements