Section 9 of Code of Civil Procedure 1908 "Courts to try all civil suits unless barred"
The Courts shall (subject to the provisions herein contained) have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred.
1[Explanation I].-A suit in which the right to property or to an office is contested is a suit of a civil nature, notwithstanding that such right may depend entirely on the decision of questions as to religious rites or ceremonies.
2[Explanation II].-For the purposes of this section, it is immaterial whether or not any fees are attached to the office referred to in Explanation I or whether or not such office is attached to a particular place.]
STATE AMENDMENTS
Maharashtra.-
Section 9A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in its
application to the State of Maharashtra (hereinafter
referred to as "the principal Act"), shall be deleted.
[Vide Maharashtra Act 61 of 2018, sec. 2.]
Notwithstanding the deletion of section 9A of the principal Act,-
(1) where consideration of a preliminary issue framed under section 9A is pending on the date of commencement of the Code of Civil Procedure (Maharashtra Amendment) Act, 2018 (hereinafter, in this section, referred to as "the Amendment Act"), the said issue shall be deemed to be an issue framed under Order XIV of the principal Act and shall be decided by the Court, as it deems fit, along with all other issues, at the time of final disposal of the suit itself :
Provided that, the evidence, if any, led by any party or parties to the suit, on the preliminary issue so framed under section 9A, shall be considered by the Court along with evidence, if any, led on other issues in the suit, at the time of final disposal of the suit itself ;
(2) in all the cases, where a preliminary issue framed under section 9A has been decided, holding that the Court has jurisdiction to entertain the suit, and a challenge to such decision is pending before a revisional Court, on the date of commencement of the Amendment Act, such revisional proceedings shall stand abated :
Provided that, where a decree in such suit is appealed from any error, defect or irregularity in the order upholding jurisdiction shall be treated as one of the ground of objection in the memorandum of appeal as if it had been included in such memorandum ;
(3) in all cases, where a preliminary issue framed under section 9A has been decided, holding that the Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit, and a challenge to such decision is pending before an appellate or revisional Court, on the date of commencement of the Amendment Act, such appellate or revisional proceedings shall continue as if the Amendment Act has not been enacted and section 9A has not been deleted :
Provided that, in case the appellate or revisional Court, while partly allowing such appeal or revision, remands the matter to the trial Court for reconsideration of the preliminary issue so framed under section 9A, upon receipt of these proceedings by the trial Court, all the provisions of the principal Act shall apply ;
(4) in all cases, where an order granting an ad-interim relief has been passed under sub-section (2) of section 9A prior to its deletion, such order shall be deemed to be an ad-interim order made under Order XXXIX of the principal Act and the Court shall, at the time of deciding the application in which such an order is made, either confirm or vacate or modify such order.
[Vide Maharashtra Act 61 of 2018, sec. 3.]
Maharashtra.-
In section 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Maharashtra
Amendment) Act, 2018, for clause (1), the following clause
shall be substituted and shall be deemed to have been
substituted with effect from 27th June 2018, being the date
of commencement of the said Act, namely:-
"(1) where consideration of a preliminary issue framed
under section 9A is pending on the date of commencement of
the Code of Civil Procedure (Maharashtra Amendment) Act,
2018 (hereinafter, in this section, referred to as "the
Amendment Act"), the said issue shall be decided and
disposed of by the Court under section 9A, as if the said
section 9A has not been deleted;".
[Vide Maharashtra Act 72 of 2018, sec. 2, (w.e.f.
27-6-2018.)]
---
1. Explanation renumbered as Explanation I thereof by Act 104 of 1976, s. 5 (w.e.f. 1-2-1977).
2. Ins. by s. 5, ibid., (w.e.f. 1-2-1977).
Section 10 of Code of Civil Procedure 1908 "Stay of suit"
No Court shall proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is also directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title where such suit is pending in the same or any other Court in 1[India] have jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed, or in any Court beyond the limits of 1[India] established or continued by 2[the Central Government 3* * *.] and having like jurisdiction, or before 4[the Supreme Court].
Explanation.-The pendency of a suit in a foreign Court does not preclude the Courts in 1[India] from trying a suit founded on the same cause of action.
------
1. Subs. by Act 2 of 1951, s. 3, for "the States".
2. Subs. by the A.O. 1937, "the G.G. in C."
3. The words "or the Crown Representative" omitted by the A.O. 1948.
4. Subs. by the A.O. 1950, for "His Majesty in Council".
Section 11 of Code of Civil Procedure 1908 "Res judicata"
No Court shall try any suit or issue in which the matter directly and substantially in issue has been directly and substantially in issue in a former suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim, litigating under the same title, in a Court competent to try such subsequent suit or the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised, and has been heard and finally decided by such Court.
Explanation I.- The expression former suit shall denote a suit which has been decided prior to a suit in question whether or not it was instituted prior thereto.
Explanation II.- For the purposes of this section, the competence of a Court shall be determined irrespective of any provisions as to a right of appeal from the decision of such Court.
Explanation III.-The matter above referred to must in the former suit have been alleged by one party and either denied or admitted, expressly or impliedly, by the other.
Explanation IV.- Any matter which might and ought to have been made ground of defence or attack in such former suit shall be deemed to have been a matter directly and substantially in issue in such suit.
Explanation V.- Any relief claimed in the plaint, which is not expressly granted by the decree, shall for the purposes of this section, be deemed to have been refused.
Explanation VI.- Where persons litigate bona fide in respect of a public right or of a private right claimed in common for themselves and others, all persons interested in such right shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to claim under the persons so litigating .
1[Explanation VII.- The provisions of this section shall apply to a proceeding for the execution of a decree and references in this section to any suit, issue or former suit shall be construed as references, respectively, to a proceeding for the execution of the decree, question arising in such proceeding and a former proceeding for the execution of that decree.
Explanation VIII.- An issue heard and finally decided by a Court of limited jurisdiction, competent to decide such issue, shall operate as res judicata in a subsequent suit, notwithstanding that such Court of limited jurisdiction was not competent to try such subsequent suit or the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised.]
---------
1. Ins. by Act 104 of 1976, s. 6 (w.e.f. 1-2-1977).