Objections to jurisdiction
Full Text
(1) No objection as to the place of suing shall be allowed by any Appellate or Revisional Court unless such objection was taken in the Court of first instance at the earliest possible opportunity and in all cases where issues are settled at or before such settlement, and unless there has been a consequent failure of justice.
(2) No objection as to the competence of a Court with reference to the pecuniary limits of its jurisdiction shall be allowed by any Appellate or Revisional Court unless such objection was taken in the Court of first instance at the earliest possible opportunity, and, in all cases where issues are settled, at or before such settlement, and unless there has been a consequent failure of justice.
(3) No objection as to the competence of the executing Court with reference to the local limits of its jurisdiction shall be allowed by any Appellate or Revisional Court unless such objection was taken in the executing Court at the earliest possible opportunity, and unless there has been a consequent failure of justice.
Plain English Summary
Section 21 mandates that no objection regarding the place of suing (territorial), pecuniary limits, or local execution competence shall be entertained by an appellate or revisional court unless it was raised in the court of first instance at the earliest opportunity (at or before settlement of issues) AND resulted in a consequent failure of justice.
Key Legal Elements
- Three Cumulative Conditions: Objection barred on appeal unless (1) taken in the trial court, (2) raised at the earliest opportunity / before issues settled, and (3) caused a consequent failure of justice.
- Territorial Waiver (Sec 21(1)): Place of suing objections are waived if not raised before the trial court at the threshold.
- Pecuniary Waiver (Sec 21(2)): Valuation and pecuniary competence objections cannot be raised subsequently without satisfying the failure of justice test.
- Execution Jurisdiction (Sec 21(3)): Protects decrees against local limit objections taken belatedly against executing courts.
- Subject-Matter Exception: Does not cure inherent lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, which remains a non-waivable nullity.
Practical Note
Golden rule for civil trial advocates: Territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction defects are mere procedural irregularities capable of waiver; they do NOT render a decree an inherent nullity (*Kiran Singh v. Chaman Paswan*). A defendant must plead territorial and pecuniary objections in the written statement at or before framing of issues under Order 14. If omitted then, Section 21 absolutely bars raising them on appeal. Even if raised in time, the appellant must establish substantive prejudice causing 'failure of justice'. Note: Inherent lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is NOT saved by Section 21 and can be raised at any stage.
हिंदी पाठ
(1) वाद लाने के स्थान के बारे में कोई भी आक्षेप किसी अपील या पुनरीक्षण न्यायालय द्वारा तब तक अनुज्ञात नहीं किया जाएगा जब तक कि ऐसा आक्षेप प्रथम बार के न्यायालय में यथासम्भव शीघ्र अवसर पर और उन सभी मामलों में, जिनमें विवादक स्थिर किए जाते हैं, ऐसे स्थिरीकरण पर या उससे पहले न उठाया गया हो, और जब तक कि उसके परिणामस्वरूप न्याय की विफलता न हुई हो।
(2) किसी न्यायालय की उसकी अधिकारिता की धन-सम्बन्धी सीमाओं के प्रति निर्देश से सक्षमता के बारे में कोई भी आक्षेप किसी अपील या पुनरीक्षण न्यायालय द्वारा तब तक अनुज्ञात नहीं किया जाएगा जब तक कि ऐसा आक्षेप प्रथम बार के न्यायालय में यथासम्भव शीघ्र अवसर पर, और उन सभी मामलों में जिनमें विवादक स्थिर किए जाते हैं, ऐसे स्थिरीकरण पर या उससे पहले न उठाया गया हो, और जब तक कि उसके परिणामस्वरूप न्याय की विफलता न हुई हो।
(3) निष्पादन न्यायालय की उसकी अधिकारिता की स्थानीय सीमाओं के प्रति निर्देश से सक्षमता के बारे में कोई भी आक्षेप किसी अपील या पुनरीक्षण न्यायालय द्वारा तब तक अनुज्ञात नहीं किया जाएगा जब तक कि ऐसा आक्षेप निष्पादन न्यायालय में यथासम्भव शीघ्र अवसर पर न उठाया गया हो, और जब तक कि उसके परिणामस्वरूप न्याय की विफलता न हुई हो।