Immovable property jurisdiction
ANISH KHANNA
(Querist) 12 September 2013
This query is : Resolved
Help wanted from learned advocates/experts.
Case summary.
I have booked a property in Bhiwadi Rajasthan, and there is a dispute with the builder,and builder reg office is in Delhi. I have only singed a booking form which says only Bhiwadi or Delhi courts have Jurisdiction. So i have filed a case of permanent Injunction, Civil case in Delhi Courts, now the defendant lawyer is challenging the Jurisdiction. In reply my lawyer has told the court that a relief can be obtained under section 16 CPC (16 D and O.VII R-11 of CPC) on personal obedience.
On the last argument date the defendant advocate objected on grounds that a relief for rights is demanded in the property.so when the rights are demanded it is not covered under personal obidience / above mentioned section and the Judge seemed to be convinved with him
My question is
1.Is my case maintainable in Delhi courts.And if yes on what grounds
2. The defendant company has already told on application form that in case of disputed,it can be Delhi or Bhiwadi courts only does law accepts this written statement.
3. If yes what sections i can see to get my case maintainable in Delhi courts.
Please Help me out..
niranjan
(Expert) 12 September 2013
Your suit is maintainable under sec.20 of CPC.
ANISH KHANNA
(Querist) 12 September 2013
THANKS SIR I WILL READ IT AND GET BACK
ANISH KHANNA
(Querist) 12 September 2013
SIR CAN YOU PLEASE TELL ME MORE ON THIS SEC-20 OF CPC HOW ?
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 13 September 2013
Section 20 CPC is as under:
20. Other suits to be instituted where defendants reside or cause of action arises? Subject to the limitations aforesaid, every suit shall be instituted in Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction?
(a) the defendant, or each of the defendants where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of the suit, actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain; or
(b) any of the defendants, where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of the suit actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain, provided that in such case either the leave of the Court is given, or the defendants who do not reside, or carry on business, or personally work for gain, as aforesaid, acquiesce in such institution; or
(c) the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises.
[9] [* * * *]
[10] [Explanation].?A corporation shall be deemed to carry on business at its sole or principal office in India or, in respect of any cause of action arising at any place where it has also a subordinate office, at such place.
Illustrations
(a) A is a tradesman in Calcutta, B carries on business in Delhi. B, by his agent in Calcutta, buys goods of A and requests A to deliver them to the East Indian Railway Company. A delivers the goods accordingly in Calcutta. A may sue B for the price of the goods either in Calcutta, where the cause of action has arisen or in Delhi, where B carries on business.
(b) A resides at Simla, B at Calcutta and C at Delhi A, B and C being together at Benaras, B and C make a joint promissory note payable on demand, and deliver it to A. A may sue B and C at Benaras, where the cause of action arose. He may also sue them at Calcutta, where B resides, or at Delhi, where C resides; but in each of these cases, if the non-resident defendant object, the suit cannot proceed without the leave of the Court.
ANISH KHANNA
(Querist) 13 September 2013
Mr. Goyal my case is for immovable property still it can be covered in section 20 which you have explained in your reply seems not related to immovable property. Defendant lawyer has told the court that in plaintiff prayer that is me has asked rights in the property.And Delhi courts have no jurisdiction as per judgment in Harshad Chiman Lal Modi v. D.L.F. Universal Ltd., AIR 2006 SC 464 case.And the judge seemed to be convinced by his arguments.
