In the Indian legal system, the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908, governs the adjudication of civil disputes. Central to this framework is the concept of “suits of civil nature,” which determines the jurisdiction of civil courts. Understanding this concept is essential for law students and legal practitioners alike.

MEANING AND DEFINITION

A suit is considered of a civil nature if it pertains to the determination of civil rights and obligations of individuals. According to Section 9 of the CPC:

“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 implies that unless a suit is explicitly or implicitly barred, civil courts have the authority to adjudicate matters involving civil rights. The term “civil nature” encompasses a wide range of disputes, including those related to property, contracts, torts, and personal rights.

SCOPE AND JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 9 OF CPC

Section 9 establishes the broad jurisdiction of civil courts to entertain suits of a civil nature. However, this jurisdiction is subject to certain exceptions where suits are either expressly or impliedly barred.

• Expressly Barred Suits: These are suits explicitly prohibited by a statute from being entertained by civil courts. For instance, certain disputes may be assigned exclusively to specialized tribunals, thereby barring civil court jurisdiction.

• Impliedly Barred Suits: These are suits where, although not explicitly barred, the subject matter is such that it is inferred that civil courts should not entertain them. This inference may arise from the nature of the dispute or the existence of alternative mechanisms for resolution.

The Supreme Court, in the case of Dhulabhai v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1969 SC 78, laid down principles to determine when the jurisdiction of civil courts is impliedly barred. The court held that where a statute provides a special remedy, the jurisdiction of civil courts is barred if there is an express provision to that effect or if such a bar can be inferred by necessary implication.

ESSENTIALS OF SUITS OF CIVIL NATURE

For a suit to be classified as of a civil nature, the following essentials must be satisfied:

1. Subject Matter Involves Civil Rights: The primary issue should relate to the determination of civil rights and obligations, such as rights related to property, contracts, or personal status.

2. Absence of Express or Implied Bar: There should be no statutory provision that expressly or impliedly bars the jurisdiction of civil courts over the subject matter.

In the case of Most Rev. P.M.A. Metropolitan v. Moran Mar Marthoma, AIR 1995 SC 2001, the Supreme Court emphasized that the civil court’s jurisdiction extends to all matters of a civil nature except where it is barred. The court further clarified that even if the adjudication involves the determination of religious rights, as long as the principal issue is of a civil nature, the suit is maintainable.

EXCEPTIONS TO SUITS OF CIVIL NATURE

While the jurisdiction of civil courts is extensive, certain matters are excluded from their purview:

• Purely Religious Rites and Ceremonies: Disputes solely concerning religious practices, without any civil right involved, are not entertained by civil courts. For example, matters related to the conduct of religious rituals without any implication on civil rights are outside the jurisdiction of civil courts.

• Caste Questions: Issues pertaining exclusively to caste status or membership, without affecting any civil right, are not considered suits of civil nature. However, if such issues affect civil rights, they may be entertained by civil courts.

In Sinha Ramanuja Jeer v. Ranga Ramanuja Jeer, AIR 1961 SC 1720, the Supreme Court held that a suit remains of a civil nature even if it involves questions of religion or caste, provided the principal issue is civil. This underscores the principle that the involvement of religious or caste questions does not per se oust the jurisdiction of civil courts if civil rights are at stake.

CASE LAWS ILLUSTRATING SUITS OF CIVIL NATURE

1. Ganga Bai v. Vijay Kumar, (1974) 2 SCC 393: The Supreme Court observed that there is an inherent right in every person to bring a suit of a civil nature unless the suit is barred by statute. This case reinforces the broad jurisdiction of civil courts in civil matters.

2. Shankar Narayan Potti v. K. Sreedevi, (1998) 6 SCC 587: The court held that civil courts have inherent jurisdiction in all types of civil disputes unless a part of that jurisdiction is carved out by a statutory provision conferring it on another tribunal or authority. This case highlights the principle that exclusion of jurisdiction cannot be readily inferred and must be explicitly provided or necessarily implied.

LEGAL MAXIMS AND DOCTRINES RELEVANT TO SUITS OF CIVIL NATURE

• Ubi jus ibi remedium: This legal maxim means “where there is a right, there is a remedy.” It underlines the principle that individuals have the right to seek legal redress for the violation of their civil rights, reinforcing the jurisdiction of civil courts in such matters.

• Presumption in Favor of Jurisdiction: Courts generally presume in favor of their jurisdiction unless a statute expressly or by necessary implication excludes it. This presumption ensures that individuals are not deprived of legal remedies unless clearly mandated by law.

PROCEDURE FOR INSTITUTING SUITS OF CIVIL NATURE

The procedure for instituting a suit of civil nature under the CPC involves several stages:

Presentation of Plaint: The plaintiff initiates the suit by filing a plaint, which is a written statement of claim, in the appropriate civil court. The plaint must disclose a cause of action and be filed within the…