Order 14 Rule 2 CPC | Where Suit Involving Mixed Question Of Law & Fact Can Be Disposed On Issue Of Law Alone, Same Must Be Decided First: Manipur HC

The Manipur High Court has recently held that Order 14 Rule 2(1) CPC is a general rule which provides that the Court shall pronounce judgment on all issues, notwithstanding the fact that the case may be disposed of on a preliminary issue.However, it added that an exception to this Rule is provided under Order 14 Rule 2(2), which states that where issues of law and of fact arise in the same suit and the Court finds that the suit, or any part thereof, may be disposed of on an issue of law only, it may try that issue first."In effect, Order 14 Rule 2(2) CPC carves out an exception to Order 14 Rule 2(1) CPC, by providing that where issues of law and of fact arise in the same suit and the Court finds that the suit, or any part thereof, may be disposed of on an issue of law only, it may try that issue first. Such issue must either relate to the jurisdiction of the Court or it must relate to a bar to the suit created by any law for the time being in force," Chief Justice Sanjay Kumar observed.The clarification was rendered in a second appeal filed under Section 100 of the CPC for a declaration that the Appellant (original plaintiff) is the owner of the land in dispute and seeking a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment thereof.In the plaintiff's case, his grandfather was the owner and possessor of the hill land situated at Awungtang Village (Suit Schedule A land). Suit Schedule B land is a portion of Suit Schedule A hill land, lying towards the west, which is a little larger than half of the entire land. On the death of his grandfather, his son inherited the Suit Schedule A land. Around 1982, one person tried to encroach upon the southern portion of the suit land, but he was prevented from doing so. However, the person who tried to encroach sold the suit land to the defendants, his relations.The plaintiff got married in 1993, and at that time, his father gifted the Suit Schedule - A land to him. The plaintiff claimed that he constructed his house thereon and was in possession. He further claimed that he came away to the village, leaving the Suit Schedule A land in the care of his cousin. While so, the defendants started digging the suit land in March 2015, constraining him from instituting the suit.Jurisdiction under Order 14 Rule 2Order 14 Rule 2(1) CPC states that, for this purpose, the Court may postpone settlement of other issues until after that issue of law has been determined and may then deal with the suit in accordance with the decision on that issue. It remarked,"A plain reading of this provision clearly manifests that if the Trial Court, having found an issue of law either relating to its jurisdiction or to a bar to the suit created by any law, may first decide that issue and settlement of other issues would depend upon its decision on that issue. Such an issue of law would ordinarily be tried as a preliminary issue before the trial itself as it would not require evidence, being purely an issue of law."The Court referred to the case of Major S.S. Khanna vs. Brig. F.J. Dillon, where the Supreme Court observed that the jurisdiction to try an issue of law under Order 14 Rule 2 CPC might be exercised only where, in the opinion of the Court, the whole suit or a part thereof may be disposed of on the issue of law alone as the CPC does not confer jurisdiction upon the Court to try a suit on mixed issues of law and fact as preliminary issues.As per the Supreme Court, normally, all issues in a suit should be tried by the Court, and not doing so, especially when the decision on issues even of law would depend upon the decision on issues of fact, would result in a lop-sided trial of the suit.It also relied on the case of Ramesh B. Desai vs. Bipin Vadilal Mehta, where the Supreme Court observed that, though there was a slight amendment in the language of Order 14 Rule 2 CPC in the year 1976, the principle enunciated in Major S.S. Khanna (supra) still holds good. There could be no departure from the principle that the CPC does not confer jurisdiction upon the Court to try a suit on mixed issues of law and fact as preliminary issues, and where the decision on an issue of law depends upon an issue of fact, it could not be tried as a preliminary issue.In Thiruvambadi Rubber Co. Ltd. vs. N.K. Damodaran Nair and others, the Kerala High Court observed that Order 14 Rule 2(2) CPC confers jurisdiction to try only an issue of law as a preliminary issue, provided that such issue is either related to the jurisdiction of the Court or to a bar to the suit created by any law for the time being in force.It was noted that there might be an inherent lack of jurisdiction or territorial jurisdiction or pecuniary jurisdiction or a suit may be barred by res judicata or limitation and that all cases involving a lack of jurisdiction would depend either on a pure question of law or a mixed question of law and fact.The Court concluded that upon careful consideration of...

Order 14 Rule 2 CPC | Where Suit Involving Mixed Question Of Law & Fact Can Be Disposed On Issue Of Law Alone, Same Must Be Decided First: Manipur HC

Shrutika Pandey

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Order 14 Rule 2 CPC | Where Suit Involving Mixed Question Of Law & Fact Can Be Disposed On Issue Of Law Alone, Same Must Be Decided First: Manipur HC

Shrutika Pandey

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers