IMPORTANT POINT
Plaintiff had option to file suit in either of two Courts having territorial jurisdiction over suit property

C.M. No. 24874-C-II of 2012 :

L.N. Mittal, J.—Allowed as prayed for. Main Case :

Defendant No. 1 Harmesh Kumar Jain has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing judgment dated 6.9.2012 (Annexure P-7) passed by learned Additional District Judge (Ad hoc), Fast Track Court, Ropar.

2. Respondent No. 1 - plaintiff Ravinder Kumar Jain has filed suit against defendant No. 1 - petitioner and proforma respondents No. 2 to 5 in the Civil Court at Rupnagar for partition of four properties i.e., one property situated at Rupnagar and three properties situated at Chandigarh.

3. Defendant No. I moved application (Annexure P-4) for dismissing the suit qua properties No. 2 to 4 because the same are situated outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Court at Rupnagar. Respondent No. 1 - plaintiff, by filing reply, opposed the said application. The Trial Court, vide order dated 28.2.2011 (Annexure P-6), allowed the said application and rejected the plaint under Order VII, Rule 11-D of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short - C.P.C.) qua properties No. 2 to 4 situated at Chandigarh.

4. Appeal against order Annexure P-6 of the Trial Court, preferred by plaintiff, has been allowed by learned lower appellate Court vide impugned judgment Annexure P-7 and thereby, order Annexure P-6 passed y the Trial Court has been set aside. Feeling aggrieved, defendant No. 1 has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to challenge judgment Annexure P-7 passed by the lower appellate Court.

5. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file.

6. At the outset, it has to be noticed that the plaint was rejected by the Trial Court under Order VII, Rule 11 (d), C.P.C., which amounts to decree, as defined in Section 2 (2), C.P.C. Consequently, the impugned judgment would be appealable and the instant revision petition would not lie.

7. However, even on merits, the petitioner cannot succeed. Section 17, C.P.C. provides for the situation arising in the instant lis. Section 17, C.P.C. is reproduced hereunder :

“17. Suits for immovable property situate within jurisdiction of different Courts.—Where a suit is to obtain relief respecting, or compensation for wrong to, immovable property situate within the jurisdiction of different Courts, the suit may be instituted in any Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction any portion of the property is situate:

Provided that, in respect of the value of the subject-matter of the suit, the entire claim is cognizable by such Court.”

8. In the instant case, the suit properties are situated within jurisdiction of different Courts i.e., Rupnagar and Chandigarh. Consequently, in view of Section 17, C.P.C, the suit could be filed in either of the two Courts. The plaintiff has opted to file the suit at Rupnagar. Civil Court at Rupnagar has territorial jurisdiction to try the suit regarding all the four properties in view of express provision of Section 17, C.P.C. It may also be added that both the parties are also residents of Rupnagar i.e., within the territorial jurisdiction of Court at Rupnagar. Consequently, in view of Section 20, C.P.C. also, the said Court would have territorial jurisdiction to try the suit.

9. Counsel for the petitioner raised a very strange argument. It was contended that Section 17, C.P.C. applies to a suit, where a single property is situated within jurisdiction of different Courts. The contention is most misconceived and meritless. It is difficult to contemplate that a single immovable property is situated within jurisdiction of two different Courts. Even otherwise, Section 17, C.P.C. does not make any such stipulation that it would apply to a single immovable property situated within the jurisdiction of two different Courts. On the contrary, Section 17, C.P.C. contemplates a factual situation, as contained in the instant lis. In the instant case, the suit property, which comprises of four properties,