The main legal point established in the judgment is that the jurisdiction of the civil Court can be impliedly barred when a statute provides a special remedy to an aggrieved party, such as a right of appeal. Additionally, if an equally efficacious relief can be obtained by filing a statutory appeal, a suit for injunction may not be competent.

Vinod K.Sharma, J.

1. Present revision petition has been filed against the order dated 6.1.2005 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gurgaon dismissing an application filed by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 51 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the Code) for rejection of the plaint.

2. The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for permanent injunction to challenge the order passed under Section 14-B of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act (for short the Act) imposing damages for non- payment of contribution in time for the period from June, 1993 to January, 2001.

3. Besides contesting the suit on merit an application was moved for rejection of plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code on the plea that the suit as framed was not competent and was liable to be rejected. It was pleaded in the application that the suit was barred under sub-section (D) Order 7-1 as any person aggrieved by a notification issued by the Central Government or an order passed by the Central Government or any authority, under the proviso to sub-section (3), or sub-section (4), of Section 1, or Section 3, or sub- section (i) of Section 7-A, or Section 7-B (except an order rejecting an application for review referred to in sub-section (5) or Section 7-C, or Section 14-B of the Act, may prefer an appeal to a Tribunal against such notification or order. It was also pleaded that when a specific remedy is available to the plaintiff the suit was not maintainable and therefore, the plaint was liable to be rejected. It was also pleaded that the civil Court has no jurisdiction to try the present suit as the plaintiff-respondent had a remedy of appeal before the Tribunal under Section 7(i) of the Act. Provisions of Section 41(h) of the Specific Relief Act were also invoked.

Said application was contested on the plea that if the authorities acted against the statute or did not follow procedure prescribed by law/statute then the civil Court has every jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit.

4. Learned trial Court came to the conclusion that the plaint can be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code, if it does not show any cause of action or the plaintiff has not paid the proper court-fee or the jurisdiction of the civil Court has been specifically barred. However, no such provisions were shown which barred the jurisdiction of the civil Court. Resultantly, the application was dismissed.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner by placing reliance on the judgment of Honble Supreme Court in the case of NDMC v. Satish Chand (deceased) by LRs Ram Chand, 2003(4) RCR(Civil) 373 : 2003(10) Supreme Court Cases 38 contended that the jurisdiction of the civil Court was impliedly barred as remedy of appeal was provided under the statute itself against an order passed under Section 14-B of the Act which was challenged by the plaintiff-respondent. The Honble Supreme Court in NDMC v. Satish Chand (supra) has been pleased to lay down as under :-

"Section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 gives a wide jurisdiction to the civil Courts to try all suits of civil nature "excepting suits of which their statute itself contains a provision that the jurisdiction of a civil court is barred." An implied bar may arise when a statute provides a special remedy to an aggrieved party like a right of appeal as contained in the Punjab Municipal Act. Section 84 of the Act provides a complete remedy to a party aggrieved by the assessment and levy of tax. Section 86 provides that the remedy of appeal is the only remedy available to a party to challenge the assessment and restrains a party from taking recourse to any other mode. A provision like this is the implied bar envisaged in Section 9 CPC against filing a civil suit.

Besides, the position in law has been well settled by the Supreme Court in various decisions. Sections 84 and 86 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 bar the jurisdiction of the civil Court, where the grievan