CPC Case Brief – Begum Sahiba v. Nawab Mansur (Return of Plaint)

Spread the love

You can grab notes on other topics of CPC here.

Facts: Begum Sahib, the plaintiff, is the daughter of the Mehar Sajeda Sultan. The defendants are her siblings and their children. The mother apparently made an oral will before her death in Delhi in the presence of the defendants because of which certain actions were taken by her siblings regarding the property. Now she has prayed for the following;

“(a) Pass a decree of declaration declaring the oral Will dated 1.1.1995 allegedly made by Her Highness Begum Mehar Taj Sajida Sultan was never made;

(b) to pass a decree of partition in favour of the plaintiff in respect of her entitled share in view of the Islamic Personal (c) Pass a decree of rendition of account in respect of the earnings of the above-mentioned properties w.e.f. June, 2000 until filing of the present suit;

Issue: Is Delhi the proper jurisdiction for the institution of the present suit while the properties are situated in the district of Gurgaon and thereby doesn’t the plaint need to be returned under Order 7 Rule 10?

The plaintiff argued that since the alleged oral declaration was made at Delhi which is reason for this suit, the plaintiff has the necessary cause of action to file the suit in Delhi under the Proviso to section 16 of the code and the court has jurisdiction to entertain it

The defendants raised an objection to the jurisdiction of the trial court. They pleaded that the main relief sought in the plaint was for partition of the properties situate in Gurgaon, not falling within the jurisdiction of Delhi court and the declarations sought for are also related to the said properties and in the light of Section 16(b)and (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short ’the Code’), the jurisdiction to entertain the suit was with the concerned court in the State of Haryana and hence the plaint was liable to be rejected. Counsel further submitted that the proviso to Section 16 of the Code had no application since this was not a case where mere personal obedience to the decree would result in an effective decree. He further pointed out that Section 20 of the Code will have no application in a case where Section 16 squarely applies since Section 20 was only a residuary provision.

You can grab notes on other topics of CPC here.

 


Spread the love

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *