Section 99: No decree to be reversed or modified for error or irregularity not affecting merits or jurisdiction

 

Code of Civil Procedure 

 

99. No decree to be reversed or modified for error or irregularity not affecting merits or jurisdiction.—No decree shall be reversed or substantially varied, nor shall any case be remanded, in appeal on account of any misjoinder ¹[or non-joinder] of parties or causes of action or any error, defect or irregularity in any proceedings in the suit, not affecting the merits of the case or the jurisdiction of the Court :

²[Provided that nothing in this section shall apply to non-joinder of a necessary party.]

Note: 1. Ins. by Act 104 of 1976, s. 35 (w.e.f. 1-2-1977).

2. Proviso Added by s. 35 ibid. (w.e.f. 1-2-1977).

Code of Civil Procedure 

Jurisdiction of courts and venue of suits

Jurisdiction means the authority by which a court has to decide matters that are brought before it for adjudication. The limit of this authority is imposed by charter, statute or commission. If no such limit is imposed or defined that the jurisdiction is said to be unlimited.

Limitation of jurisdiction of civil court is basically four kinds:

[1] Jurisdiction over the subject matter- to try certain matters by certain court is limited by statute (Ex. Small cause court- suit for money due under promissory note or a suit for price of work done)

[2] Place of suing or territorial jurisdiction – A territorial limit of jurisdiction for each court is fixed by Government.

[3] Jurisdiction over persons – All person of whatever nationality are subject to the jurisdiction of the country except foreign state.

[4] Pecuniary jurisdiction depending on pecuniary value of suit –There is no pecuniary jurisdiction of high court and district court.

Jurisdiction may be further classified: [a] Original jurisdiction [b] Appellate jurisdiction

Criminal and appellate jurisdiction- Supreme Court, High Courts and District courts have both original and appellate jurisdiction in various matter.

Decision where appeal heard by two or more Judges

 

Code of Civil Procedure Section

 

98. Decision where appeal heard by two or more Judges.—(1) Where an appeal is heard by a Bench of two or more Judges, the appeal shall be decided in accordance with the opinion of such Judges or of the majority (if any) of such Judges.

(2) Where there is no such majority which concurs in a judgment varying or reversing the decree appealed from, such decree shall be confirmed :

Provided that where the Bench hearing the appeal is ¹[composed of two or other even number of Judges belonging to a Court consisting of more Judges than those constituting the Bench] and the Judges composing the Bench differ in opinion on a point of law, they may state the point of law upon which they differ and the appeal shall then be heard upon that point only by one or more of the other Judges, and such point shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority (if any) of the Judges who have heard the appeal, including those who first heard it.

²[(3) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to alter or otherwise affect any provision of the letters to patent of any High Court.]

Note: 1. Subs. by Act 104 of 1976, s. 34, for certain words (w.e.f. 1-2-1977).

2. Ins. by Act 18 of 1928, s. 2 and the First Sch.

Code of Civil Procedure Section

Appeal from final decree where no appeal from preliminary decree

 

Code of Civil Procedure Section

 

97. Appeal from final decree where no appeal from preliminary decree.—Where any party aggrieved by a preliminary decree passed after the commencement of this Code does not appeal from such decree, he shall be precluded from disputing its correctness in any appeal which may be preferred from the final decree.

 

Code of Civil Procedure Section

Section 96: Appeal from original decree

Code of Civil Procedure Section 95. Compensation for obtaining arrest, attachment or injunction on insufficient ground.

PART VII

APPEALS

APPEALS FROM ORIGINAL DECREES

96. Appeal from original decree.—(1) Save where otherwise expressly provided in the body of this Code or by any other law for the time being in force, an appeal shall lie from every decree passed by any Court exercising original jurisdiction to the Court authorized to hear appeals from the decisions of such Court.

(2) An appeal may lie from an original decree passed ex parte.

(3) No appeal shall lie from a decree passed by the Court with the consent of parties.

¹[(4) No appeal shall lie, except on a question of law, from a decree in any suit of the nature cognisable by Courts of Small Causes, when the amount or value of the subject-matter of the original suit does not exceed ²[ten thousand rupees.]]

Note 1. Ins. by Act 104 of 1976, s. 33 (w.e.f. 1-2-1977).

2. Subs. by Act 46 of 1999, s. 9, for “three thousand rupees” (w.e.f. 1-7-2002).

Part in Red is original provisions from CPC reproduced here for reference.

Code of Civil Procedure Section 97. Appeal from final decree where no appeal from preliminary decree.

Simplified Explanation:

Section 96 provides for appeal, and the provision has been amended by 1999 Act that appeal would lie only, provided there is a dispute of more than of Rs.10,000/-.

In the First Appeal, it is permissible for the appellate court to re-examine and re-appreciate the evidence. The right to institute the suit is an inherent right, but the right of appeal is statutory.

It is evident that the First Appellate Court must decide the appeal giving adherence to the statutory provisions of Order XLI Rule 31 CPC.

Judgment:

In Delhi U.P. Madhya Pradesh Transport Co. V. New India Assurance Co., (2006) 9 SCC 213, the Apex Court held that regular first appeal should not be dismissed summarily without assigning proper reason.

More Reading:

Order XLI Rule 31. Contents, date and signature of judgment.

H. Siddiqui v. A. Ramalingam

B.V. Nagesh & Anr. v. H.V. Sreenivasa Murthy

Reference: http://www.nja.nic.in/16%20CPC.pdf

Please share and follow this blog for more such law related articles.

===================

Section 95: Compensation for obtaining arrest, attachment or injunction on insufficient grounds

Code of Civil Procedure Section 94. Supplemental proceedings.

95. Compensation for obtaining arrest, attachment or injunction on insufficient grounds.—(1) Where, in any suit in which an arrest or attachment has been effected or a temporary injunction granted under the last preceding section,—

(a) it appears to the Court that such arrest, attachment or injunction was applied for on insufficient grounds, or

(b) the suit of the plaintiff fails and it appears to the Court that there was no reasonable or probable grounds for instituting the same, the defendant may apply to the Court, and the Court may, upon such application, award against the plaintiff by its order such amount ¹[not exceeding fifty thousand rupees], as it deems a reasonable compensation to the defendant for the ²[expense or injury (including injury to reputation) caused to him]:

Provided that a Court shall not award, under this section, an amount exceeding the limits of its pecuniar jurisdiction.

(2) An order determining any such application shall bar any suit for compensation in respect of such arrest, attachment or injunction.

Note: 1. Subs. by Act 46 of 1999, s. 8, for certain words (w.e.f. 1-7-2002).

2. Subs. by Act 104 of 1976, s. 32, for “expense or injury caused to him” (w.e.f. 1-7-2002).

Part in Red is original provisions from CPC reproduced here for reference. 

Code of Civil Procedure Section 96. Appeal from original decree.

Simplified Explanation:

Section 95- This provision has been amended for providing the maximum amount of compensation in case of malicious prosecution up to fifty thousand rupees for injury to the reputation to the defendant, but the Court does not have competence to award compensation beyond its pecuniary jurisdiction.

Prior to the amendment, compensation could be awarded up to a sum of one thousand rupees and the defendant was at liberty to file a separate Suit for damages. The purpose of this provision is to award compensation to the defendant for the expenses or injury caused to him as a result of the plaintiff obtaining an order of his (defendant’s) arrest or attachment or obtaining a temporary injunction against him on insufficient grounds. In certain circumstances, injury may include injury to reputation.

However, the remedy under this Section is very special and the compensation should be granted in exceptional circumstances where Court comes to the finding that the plaintiff had abused the process of the Court by malicious prosecution.

Reference: http://www.nja.nic.in/16%20CPC.pdf

Please share and follow this blog for more such law related articles.

=================== 

Section 94: Supplemental proceedings

Code of Civil Procedure Section 93. Exercise of powers of Advocate-General outside presidency-towns.

PART VI

SUPPLEMENTAL PROCEEDINGS

94. Supplemental proceedings.—In order to prevent the ends of justice from being defeated the Court may, if it is so prescribed, —

(a) issue a warrant to arrest the defendant and bring him before the Court to show cause why he should not give security for his appearance, and if he fails to comply with any order for security commit him to the civil prison;

(b) direct the defendant to furnish security to produce any property belonging to him and to place the same at the disposal of the Court or order the attachment of any property;

(c) grant a temporary injunction and in case of disobedience commit the person guilty thereof to the civil prison and order that his property be attached and sold;

(d) appoint a receiver of any property and enforce the performance of his duties by attaching and selling his property;

(e) make such other interlocutory orders as may appear to the Court to be just and convenient.

Part in Red is original provisions from CPC reproduced here for reference.

Code of Civil Procedure Section 95. Compensation for obtaining arrest, attachment or injunction on insufficient ground.

Simplified Explanation:

Section 94 provides for supplemental proceedings. In order to prevent the ends of justice from being defeated the Court may issue a warrant of arrest against the defendant to bring him before the Court to show cause for giving security for his appearance or for failure thereof, to commit him to civil prison. It may also direct the defendant to furnish security and for failure thereof, to attach any of his properties, and also grant temporary injunction and in case of disobedience thereof, the person guilty can be sent to civil prison and his properties may be attached and sold. The Court has also been given a power to pass other interlocutory order as may appear to the Court to be just and convenient. Such a wide power has been given to the Court to prevent any person from defeating justice.

Generally, the Court should not pass any interim order in exercise of power under this Section unless there are compelling circumstances to do so, and while considering an application for such a relief, regard must be had to the nature of the controversy and the issues involved in the main matter. 

Judgment:

The Supreme Court in Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. V. Verma Transport Company, AIR 2006 SC 2800, placing reliance upon its earlier judgment in Vareed Jacob V. Sosamma Geevarghese, AIR 2004 SC 3992 explained the distinction between incidental and supplemental proceedings explaining that incidental proceedings are those which arise out of the main proceedings.

Reference: http://www.nja.nic.in/16%20CPC.pdf

Please share and follow this blog for more such law related articles.

===================

Exercise of powers of Advocate-General outside presidency-towns

 

Code of Civil Procedure Section

 

93. Exercise of powers of Advocate-General outside presidency-towns.— The powers conferred by sections 91 and 92 on the Advocate-General may, outside the presidency-towns, be, with the previous sanction of the State Government, exercised also by the Collector or by such officer as the State Government may appoint in this behalf.

 

Code of Civil Procedure Section