SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Bom) 397

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Sandeep V. Marne J.
Grand Paradi Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. & Ors. - Plaintiffs
Versus
Mont Blanc Properties & Industries Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. - Defendants
Interim Application (L) No. 4009 of 2024 In Suit No. 99 of 2002
Decided On : 23-02-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Plaintiff :Mr. Navroz Seervai, Senior Advocate a/w Ms. Lizom Wangdi, Ms. Bindi Dave, Mr. Raghav Gupta, Mr. Kashish Mainkar & Ms. Sanyukta Karne i/b Wadia Ghandy & Co., Mr. Janak Dwarkadas, Senior Advocate and Mr. Vineet Naik, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Rahul Dwarkadas, Ms. Sukhada Wagle, Nutash Kotwal i/b Veritas Legal
For the Respondent:Mr. Janak Dwarkadas, Senior Advocate and Mr. Vineet Naik, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Rahul Dwarkadas, Ms. Sukhada Wagle, Nutash Kotwal i/b Veritas Legal, Mr. Navroz Seervai, Senior Advocate a/w Ms. Lizom Wangdi, Ms. Bindi Dave, Mr. Raghav Gupta, Mr. Kashish Mainkar & Ms. Sanyukta Karne i/b Wadia Ghandy & Co., Mr. Cyrus Ardeshir, a/w Ms. Radhika Gupta & Saher Naqvi i/b Khaitan

The High Court loses jurisdiction to decide amendment applications for suits automatically transferred to the City Civil Court under Section 4A of the Bombay City Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2023.

Headnote:(A) Bombay City Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2023 - Section 4A - Jurisdiction of High Court - Plaintiffs sought to amend suit valuation from Rs. 6,75,00,000/- to Rs. 100 Crores post-amendment of pecuniary jurisdiction - Court ruled it lost jurisdiction to decide amendment application after automatic transfer to City Civil Court under Section 4A. (Paras 2, 28, 44)

(B) Jurisdiction - The court emphasized that jurisdiction is an authority conferred on a court to decide disputes, and once lost, cannot be exercised indirectly. (Paras 45, 46)

(C) Precedent - Court distinguished the judgment in Subhashini Malik, noting the automatic transfer language in the current statute. (Paras 30, 44)

Facts of the case:
Plaintiffs, a Co-operative Housing Society, filed a suit for conveyance against a developer, initially valued at Rs. 6,75,00,000/-. Following the Amendment Act, they sought to increase the valuation to Rs. 100 Crores.

Findings of Court:
The court found it had lost jurisdiction to decide the amendment application due to automatic transfer to the City Civil Court.

Issues: Whether the High Court retains jurisdiction to decide an amendment application after the suit's transfer due to increased pecuniary jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that once a suit is transferred under Section 4A, the High Court cannot decide applications related to that suit, emphasizing the need for clear jurisdictional boundaries.

Result: Application for amendment dismissed; suit transferred to City Civil Court.

JUDGMENT :

1. Jurisdiction of this Court to decide application for amendment seeking to increase the valuation of suit over which this Court has already lost pecuniary jurisdiction is the issue that I am tasked upon to decide. Owing to loss of pecuniary jurisdiction coupled with a provision for transfer of pending suits to the City Civil Court, a simple order for transmission of papers in the Suit to City Civil Court could have been passed in the present Suit ordinary course. However, Plaintiffs’ reliance inter alia on a Full Bench judgment of Delhi High Court, ruling in favour of retention of jurisdiction to decide application for amendment in a suit slated for transfer, has necessitated this detailed judgment.

2. The issue arises in the light of the Bombay City Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2023 (Amendment Act, 2023) increasing the pecuniary jurisdiction of the City Civil Court to Rs.10 Crores. The valuation of the Suit filed by Plaintiffs in this Court is Rs.6,75,00,000/-. Under Section 4A of the Bombay City Civil Court Act, 1948 (City Civil Court Act) as amended by the Amendment Act 2023, there is a provision for transfer of all suits falling in pecuniary jurisdiction of City Civil Court and pending in this Court, as on the date of coming into force of the Amendment Act 2023, to the City Civil Court. Plaintiffs have filed Interim Application for amendment of Plaint on 5 February 2024, by which they seek to amend inter alia the valuation clause to increase the valuation of the suit at Rs. 100 Crores. The Amendment Act, 2023 has however come into force on 28 January 2024 as per the Notification issued by the Law and Judiciary Department of Government of Maharashtra on 16 January 2024. Plaintiffs however contend that notwithstanding increase of pecuniary jurisdiction of City Civil Court, since the revised valuation of the suit after allowing the amendments would be more than Rs.10 Crores, the suit would again fall in pecuniary jurisdiction of this Court. That therefore this Court has jurisdiction to decide the application for amendment of plaint. On the contrary it is the contention of the Defendant No.1 that this Court no longer has jurisdiction to decide any application, including an application for amendment of plaint, after coming into force of the Amendment Act 2023 and that City Civil Court alone will have jurisdiction to decide Plaintiffs’ application for amendment. This is a short controversy which I am tasked upon to decide by this Judgment.

3. Considering the nature of controversy that is being decided in present judgment, it is not necessary to narrate facts of the case in detail. Suffice it to record that Plaintiff No. 1 is a Co-operative Housing Society formed by flat purchasers as well as row houses purchasers in buildings complex known as ‘Grand Paradi’. Plaintiff Nos. 2 to 32 are impleaded as Plaintiffs in representative capacity on behalf of and for benefit of all 169 members of Plaintiff No. 1-Society by seeking leave of this Court under Order I Rule 8 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Defendant No.1 is a developer, who has constructed the Grand Paradi buildings. Plaintiffs’ suit essentially seeks conveyance of the buildings and lands as per computation of area more particularly described in Exhibit ‘D’ to the plaint. Plaintiffs have also sought various other incidental reliefs in the plaint. In para 59 of the Plaint, Plaintiffs valued the suit for court fees and jurisdiction at Rs.6,75,00,000/- which is described as the value of all the flats and row houses as on 27 November 1977, being the date on which the Defendant No.1 was expected to execute the conveyance of the suit property. Defendant No. 1 has filed written statement contesting the suit. One of the defences raised by Defendant No.1 is about undervaluation of the suit.

4. Before coming into effect of the Amendment Act 2023, the pecuniary jurisdiction of City Civil Court was Rs.1 Crores. By the Amendment Act 2023, notified with effect from 28 January 2024

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top