Courts to Try All Civil Suits Unless Barred: Section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)

Section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC), is a cornerstone provision outlining the jurisdiction of civil courts in India. It establishes the fundamental principle that civil courts have the authority to try all suits of a civil nature unless their jurisdiction is expressly or impliedly barred. This article delves into the intricacies of Section 9, examining its scope, exceptions, interpretations, and implications under Indian law.

Understanding Section 9: The Presumption of Jurisdiction

Section 9 of the CPC states:

"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."

This provision establishes a general presumption in favor of civil courts' jurisdiction. This means that unless there is a clear legal provision restricting a court's ability to hear a particular type of suit, the court is assumed to have the authority to adjudicate the matter. The burden of proving that a court's jurisdiction is barred rests on the party asserting such a bar.

Key Elements of Section 9

To fully understand Section 9, it's crucial to dissect its key elements:

1. "The Courts Shall": This phrase imposes a mandatory duty on civil courts to exercise jurisdiction over civil suits unless barred. It underscores the fundamental right of citizens to access justice through civil courts.

2. "Subject to the provisions herein contained": This clause acknowledges that the CPC itself contains provisions that may limit or regulate the jurisdiction of civil courts. These provisions include sections dealing with territorial jurisdiction (Sections 15-20), pecuniary jurisdiction (Section 6), and subject-matter jurisdiction (specific provisions throughout the CPC).

3. "All Suits of a Civil Nature": This is the most critical element. It defines the scope of Section 9 by specifying that it applies to suits that are "civil" in nature. Determining whether a suit is of a civil nature often requires careful analysis.

4. "Excepting Suits of Which Their Cognizance is Either Expressly or Impliedly Barred": This clause provides the exception to the general rule. Even if a suit is of a civil nature, a civil court cannot hear it if its jurisdiction is expressly or impliedly barred by law. This is the most litigated part of the section.

What Constitutes a "Suit of a Civil Nature"?

The phrase "suit of a civil nature" is not explicitly defined in the CPC. However, courts have consistently interpreted it broadly to include any suit that primarily concerns private rights and obligations. A suit relating to property, contract, tort, or any other personal right is generally considered to be of a civil nature.

• Test for Civil Nature: The primary test is whether the principal question in the suit relates to the determination of a civil right and its enforcement.

• Suits Involving Religious or Caste Questions: Suits involving questions of religious rites or ceremonies, or caste rules, are generally considered to be of a civil nature if the primary object of the suit is to establish a civil right. However, if the suit is solely about religious or caste matters, without any underlying civil right, it may not be considered a suit of a civil nature.

  • Example: A suit claiming the right to participate in religious processions or to hold a religious office with associated property rights would be considered a suit of a civil nature. However, a suit solely about the internal administration of a temple, without any connection to civil rights, might not be.

• Suits Related to Statutory Rights: Suits seeking the enforcement of rights created by statute are considered civil suits unless the statute explicitly bars the jurisdiction of civil courts.

Express and Implied Bar to Jurisdiction

The exception to Section 9's general rule is the express or implied bar to jurisdiction. It's crucial to distinguish between these two types of bars:

1. Express Bar: An express bar occurs when a statute explicitly prohibits civil courts from hearing a particular type of suit. The statute will clearly state that civil courts lack jurisdiction over the matter.

   • Example: Certain labour laws might explicitly state that disputes arising under those laws are to be adjudicated by labour tribunals, and civil courts have no jurisdiction.

2. Implied Bar: An implied bar is more complex and arises when the legislative intent to exclude the jurisdiction of civil courts can be inferred from the provisions of a statute. This inference is often drawn when a statute creates a special forum or tribunal to deal with a particular class of disputes and provides a comprehensive mechanism for resolution, including remedies and appeals.

   • Tests for Implied Bar: Several tests have been developed by courts to determine whether an implied bar exists:

     • Creation of a Special Forum: The establishment of a special tribunal or forum with exclusive jurisdiction over certain matters suggests an intention to exclude civil courts' jurisdiction.

     • Comprehensive Mechanism: If the statute provides a detailed and complete mechanism for resolving disputes, including procedures, remedies, and appeals, it is more likely that the legislature intended to exclude civil courts.

     • Adequacy of Remedies: The adequacy of the remedies available under the statute is also a relevant factor. If the statutory remedies are sufficient and effective, it strengthens the argument for an implied bar.

     • Nature of the Right: The nature of the right involved can also be relevant. If the right is a purely statutory right, created and regulated by the statute, it is more likely that the legislature intended to exclude civil court jurisdiction. However, if the right is a pre-existing common law right, the courts are more hesitant to infer an implied bar.

Leading Case Laws on Section 9

Several landmark judgments have shaped the interpretation and application of Section 9:

1. Dhulabhai v. State of Madhya Pradesh (AIR 1969 SC 78): This case laid down important principles for determining whether the jurisdiction of civil courts is barred, especially in the context of tax laws. The Supreme Court held that the exclusion of jurisdiction of civil courts is not to be readily inferred, and the burden of proof lies on the party asserting the bar.

2. Premier Automobiles Ltd. v. Kamlekar Shantaram Wadke (AIR 1975 SC 2238): This case dealt with the jurisdiction of civil courts in labour disputes. The Supreme Court held that if a dispute is covered by the Industrial Disputes Act, the jurisdiction of civil courts is impliedly barred, especially if the dispute relates to the enforcement of rights and obligations created by the Act.

3. P.M.A. Metropolitan v. M.M. Marthoma (AIR 1995 SC 2001): This case reiterated the principle that the exclusion of jurisdiction of civil courts is not to be readily inferred, and the burden lies on the party asserting such exclusion. The court emphasized that even if a special tribunal is created, the civil court's jurisdiction is not automatically barred unless the statute clearly and explicitly provides for such exclusion.

4. Rajasthan SRTC v. Bal Mukund Bairwa (2009) 4 SCC 299: The Supreme Court reiterated that Section 9 grants jurisdiction to civil courts to try all suits of civil nature unless cognizance is expressly or impliedly barred. The availability of an alternate remedy does not oust the jurisdiction of civil court.

Practical Implications of Section 9

Section 9 has significant practical implications for both litigants and the judiciary:

• Right to Access Justice: It upholds the fundamental right of citizens to access justice through civil courts for the resolution of their disputes.

• Burden of Proof: It places the burden of proving that a court's jurisdiction is barred on the party asserting such a bar. This ensures that courts do not readily decline jurisdiction.

• Judicial Review: It allows civil courts to exercise judicial review over the actions of administrative authorities, ensuring that they act within the bounds of the law.

• Safeguarding Civil Rights: It protects civil rights by providing a forum for their enforcement and redressal of grievances.

Challenges and Considerations

Despite its fundamental importance, Section 9 also presents certain challenges:

• Determining "Civil Nature": The interpretation of "suit of a civil nature" can be complex, especially in cases involving religious, caste, or customary rights.

• Inferring Implied Bars: Determining whether an implied bar exists requires careful analysis of the statute and its underlying intent.

• Overlapping Jurisdiction: In some cases, there may be overlapping jurisdiction between civil courts and special tribunals, leading to confusion and potential conflicts.

Conclusion

Section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, is a vital provision that establishes the general jurisdiction of civil courts in India. It ensures that citizens have access to a forum for the resolution of their civil disputes unless the jurisdiction of the courts is expressly or impliedly barred by law. The principles enshrined in Section 9 are essential for upholding the rule of law and protecting civil rights in India. Courts need to carefully analyze the nature of the suit and the relevant statutory provisions to determine whether they have jurisdiction to hear a particular matter. The presumption in favor of jurisdiction serves as a safeguard against arbitrary denial of access to justice.