Introduction

Once it is established that a civil court has jurisdiction to try a suit under Section 9 CPC, the next critical question arises:
Which court, in which location, can entertain the suit?

This question is answered by the rules of territorial jurisdiction, primarily contained in Sections 16 to 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. These provisions determine the geographical limits within which a civil court may exercise its authority.

Territorial jurisdiction is not a mere technicality. Filing a suit in the wrong court can lead to return of plaint, delay, increased costs, or even dismissal. This article explains these provisions clearly and practically.

1. Meaning of Territorial Jurisdiction

Territorial jurisdiction refers to the local or geographical area within which a civil court is authorised to entertain and decide a suit.

In simple terms, it answers:

• In which city, district, or place should the suit be filed?

Unlike subject-matter jurisdiction, territorial jurisdiction is concerned with location, not the nature of the dispute.

2. Scheme of Sections 16 to 20 CPC

Sections 16 to 20 CPC classify suits based on their subject matter and lay down different rules accordingly:

• Section 16 – Suits relating to immovable property

• Section 17 – Property situated within jurisdiction of different courts

• Section 18 – Uncertain local limits

• Section 19 – Suits for compensation for wrongs

• Section 20 – Other suits (mainly contractual and commercial disputes)

Together, these sections provide a comprehensive territorial framework.

3. Section 16 CPC – Suits Relating to Immovable Property

Section 16 lays down a mandatory rule:

Suits relating to immovable property shall be instituted in the court within whose local limits the property is situated.

This includes suits for:

• recovery of possession,

• partition,

• foreclosure, sale or redemption of mortgage,

• determination of any right or interest in immovable property.

Key Principle

Location of the property governs jurisdiction, not the residence of parties.

4. Section 17 CPC – Property in Multiple Jurisdictions

When immovable property is situated within the jurisdiction of more than one court, Section 17 allows the suit to be filed in any court where a portion of the property is located.

However:

• the court chosen must be competent to grant the entire relief.

This provision prevents multiplicity of proceedings for the same cause of action.

5. Section 18 CPC – Uncertain Jurisdictional Limits

Where there is uncertainty as to which court has territorial jurisdiction, Section 18 empowers a court to record a finding and proceed with the suit.

This provision ensures that litigants are not prejudiced by unclear or disputed territorial boundaries.

6. Section 19 CPC – Compensation for Wrong (Tortious Claims)

Section 19 deals with suits for compensation arising out of a wrong (such as negligence, defamation, or other civil wrongs).

Such suits may be instituted:

• where the wrong was committed, or

• where the defendant resides or carries on business.

This gives the plaintiff limited choice, but the selection must be bona fide.

7. Section 20 CPC – Other Suits (Including Contractual Disputes)

Section 20 is the most frequently invoked provision, especially in commercial and corporate litigation.

A suit may be instituted where:

• the defendant resides, or

• the defendant carries on business or works for gain, or

• the cause of action wholly or in part arises.

Cause of Action – A Practical Note

Even a part of the cause of action is sufficient to confer territorial jurisdiction, provided it is material and not illusory.

8. Contractual Jurisdiction Clauses

Parties to a contract often agree to restrict jurisdiction to one particular court.

Such clauses are:

• valid, if they choose one among courts that already have jurisdiction,

• invalid, if they confer jurisdiction on a court that otherwise has none.

Courts strictly scrutinise these clauses, especially in standard-form contracts.

9. Objection to Territorial Jurisdiction

Unlike subject-matter jurisdiction, objections to territorial jurisdiction:

• must be raised at the earliest opportunity, and

• must be accompanied by proof of failure of justice.

Failure to object in time may result in waiver.

10. Practical Importance of Territorial Jurisdiction

For Advocates

• Correct forum selection avoids return of plaint and strategic setbacks.

• Jurisdictional objections can be a powerful defensive tool.

For Litigants

• Filing in the wrong court causes avoidable delay and expense.

• Awareness helps in choosing the correct legal forum.

For Corporate Clients

• Jurisdiction impacts litigation cost, convenience, and risk exposure.

• Forum selection clauses must be drafted carefully.

Conclusion

Sections 16 to 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 provide the geographical blueprint for civil litigation in India. These provisions ensure that disputes are tried by courts with a genuine connection to the subject matter or parties.

Territorial jurisdiction is not merely procedural—it is foundational. A suit filed in the wrong court may never reach the stage of adjudication on merits. Understanding and applying these provisions correctly is therefore indispensable in civil practice.

📌 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Q1. Is territorial jurisdiction mandatory in all cases?

Yes, but objections can be waived if not raised at the proper stage.

Q2. Can a suit be filed where only part of the cause of action arises?

Yes, provided that part is material and substantial.

Q3. Can parties choose any court by agreement?
No. They may choose only among courts that otherwise have jurisdiction.

Q4. What happens if a suit is filed in the wrong territorial court?

The plaint may be returned for presentation before the proper court.

Q5. Is territorial jurisdiction as important as subject-matter jurisdiction?

Yes. While subject-matter jurisdiction cannot be waived, territorial jurisdiction must still be correctly determined to avoid procedural setbacks.