NUSLI NEVILLE WADIA versus IVORY PROPERTIES & ORS.

NUSLI NEVILLE WADIA versus IVORY PROPERTIES & ORS.

Under s.9A CPC (Maharashtra Amendment Act, 1977), issues of limitation, when involving disputed facts (mixed questions of law and fact), cannot be decided as preliminary issues; 'jurisdiction to entertain' is narrow, referring only to court's competence to receive and try the suit; hardship or inconvenience of statutory provisions cannot alter clear statutory language.

Parties
Petitioner: Nusli Neville Wadia; Respondents: Ivory Properties & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
04 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Special Leave Petition (civil) Nos. 31982 31983 of 2013 / Reference Answered; Matter to Be Placed Before Appropriate Bench for Consideration on Merits
Outcome
Reference answered; full bench decision in Meher Singh overruled; decision in Kamlakar Shantaram affirmed; matters to be placed before appropriate Bench for merits.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Preliminary Issues, Limitation, Section 9 a (as Inserted by Maharashtra Amendment Act, 1977), Order XIV Rule 2, Interpretation of Statutes
Civil Procedure Limitation Law Jurisdiction Preliminary Issues Limitation Section 9 a (as Inserted by Maharashtra Amendment Act, 1977) Order XIV Rule 2 Interpretation of Statutes

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 39 Party arguments 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nusli Neville Wadia

Petitioner

Ivory Properties & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Special Leave Petition (civil) Nos. 31982 31983 of 2013 / Reference Answered; Matter to Be Placed Before Appropriate Bench for Consideration on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether issue of limitation can be decided as a preliminary issue under s.9A of CPC (Maharashtra Amendment)
  2. 2 Interpretation and scope of 'jurisdiction to entertain' in Section 9A, CPC
  3. 3 Distinction between existence and exercise of jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

Under s.9A CPC (Maharashtra Amendment Act, 1977), issues of limitation, when involving disputed facts (mixed questions of law and fact), cannot be decided as preliminary issues; 'jurisdiction to entertain' is narrow, referring only to court's competence to receive and try the suit; hardship or inconvenience of statutory provisions cannot alter clear statutory language.

Court Disposition

Reference answered; full bench decision in Meher Singh overruled; decision in Kamlakar Shantaram affirmed; matters to be placed before appropriate Bench for merits.

Orders

  • No issue can be decided merely on the basis that it has been framed under section 9A and was pending as on commencement of Maharashtra Amendment Act, 2018.
  • Section 9A's scope for preliminary issues is limited to pure questions of law; not mixed law and fact.