Section 2-
"District", "District Court" & 'Judge', In section 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 'District", "District Court", 'Judge' are defined as follows:
"District" means the limits of the jurisdiction of a principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction (hereinafter called a "District Court" and includes the local limits of the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of the High Court Division).
"Judge" is defined in the following language:
"Judge" means the presiding officer of a Civil Court"
AKM Ruhul Amin vs District Judge 38 DLR (AD) 172.
Sections 2(A), 3, 15, 24, 38, 39 and 44A(1) –
Under section 18 of the Act the jurisdiction of a District Judge or Subordinate Judge extends (subject to the provision of section 15 of Code) to all original suits cognizable by Civil Courts.
Sonali Bank vs Abidur Rahman 42 DLR 311.
Sections 2(2)-
Decree passed on the basis of adverse possession-Though no issue was framed on the vital question of adverse possession – Decree is illegal.
Niropoma Ritchel vs Mohammad Abdul Jalil Miah 41 DLR 467.
Sections 2(2)-
Decree in a Partition suit – Necessary parties not impleaded – No Court will pass such infructuous decree as it will run into jeopardy being not binding upon them.
C Juri Talukder vs C Magni 40 DLR 532.
Section 2(2)-
Whenever executing court finds any difficulty to understand the decree it can look to the relevant judgment which gave rise to the decree for clarification and appreciating the decree properly.
Abdul Jalil Mollah vs Sree Mati Dasi and others 47 DLR 240.
Section 2(2)-
After passing of the final decree in a partition suit it is effective between the admitted co-sharers and for the purpose of a preemption proceeding where the transfer is made by a co-sharer to a stranger, this question of execution of the final decree between the cosharers is not relevant and necessary.
Shafiuddin Chowdhury (Md) vs Md Abdul Karim and others 52 DLR (AD) 41.
Section 2(2) and 2(9)-
Award given by an Arbitrator shall be deemed to be a decree and the statement of the grounds of such award to be a judgment within the meaning of section 2(2) and section 2(9) of the Code of Civil Procedure respectively. The Arbitrator shall have all the powers of Civil Court under section 36 of the Ordinance No. 2 of 1982.
Begum Lutfunessa vs N Ahmed 40 DLR 232.
Section 2(2) and Order VII, rule 11 and Order XLIII-
The suit having been found maintainable the plaint was not rejected-The impugned order though not appealable, appeal was wrongly filed against the impugned order.
Ayezaddin Sheikh vs Abdul Karim Sheikh 42 DLR 154.
Sections 2(2), 47 and 151-
An order dismissing an application made under section 47 CPC is not appealable and hence an application under section 151 would lie against such order-An order of dismissal for default not a decree.
Sonaban Bibi vs Abu Miah 38 DLR 432.
Sections 2(2), 96 & Order IX rule 13-
Appeal -Effect of its disposal- ‘Appeal’ which has not been defined in the Code, is meant to be an application by an aggrieved party asking an Appellate Court to set aside, modify or revise a decision of a subordinate Court-an 'appeal' even if irregular, incompetent or time-barred is nonetheless an appeal-the order of dismissal of a memorandum of appeal as time-barred comes within the deeming provision of section 2(2) of the Code, because by such an order the rights of parties with regard to matters in dispute are finally determined.
Abdul Mannan vs Jobeda Khatun 44 DLR (AD) 37.
Section 2(4)-
The Court of the District Judge is superior in grade to the Court of the Subordinate Judge-The Court of the Subordinate Judge cannot be the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction of a District caJled the "District Court".
SonaIi Bank vs Abidur Rahman 42 DLR 311.
Sections 2(4), 24 and 44A(1)-
The word "District Court" as used in section 44( 1) is primarily to be interpreted with reference to the definition of the District Court as given in section 2(4) of the Code-"District Court" referred to in section 44A(l) of the Code means the Court of the District Judge under section 3(1) of the Civil Courts Act and no other Court.
Sonali Bank vs Abidur Rahman 42 DLR 311.
Sections 2(9)-
Order of dismissal of a suit for default cannot be called a judgment or order contemplated by the Code.
Sonali Bank vs Md A/Akram (Badal) and others. 46 DLR 671.
Section 2(11)-
Definition of legal representative shall be given a wide meaning to include the heirs of the decreased tenant who died during the pendency of Execution Case.
Kazal Das Surma vs Pradip Das 40 DLR 541.
Sections 2(11) and 50—
The view expressed in CR No. 756 of 1981 that a fresh suit against the heirs of the deceased tenant for eviction did not receive any consideration of section 2(11) & section 50 of the Code of Civil Procedure & section 2(9) of PRC Ordinance (XX of 1963).
Kazal Das Surma vs Pradip Das 40 DLR 541.
Section 2(12) & Order 20 rule 12-
Order XX rule 12 of Civil Procedure Code is merely an enabling provision permitting the Court in a suit for possession to pass also on the plaintiff's prayer, if he so chooses, a decree for past and future mesne profits and this rule has no manner of application in a suit only for mesne profits.
Hamidul Huq Chowdhury vs Amina Khatoon and others 47 DLR 446.
Section 2(14), Order XXXIX rules 1, 2, 3, and Order XLIII r.1(r)-
Show cause notice about injunction-Whether appeal lies against the relevant order-The order cannot be termed an order of refusal of the plaintiffs prayer for temporary ad-interim injunction. An order must be a formal expression of the decision of the court but in the impugned order there is no such formal expression. It is an order simpliciter for notice upon the opposite party to show cause why injunction should not be issued and, as such, it is no order under rules l & 2 but an order under rule 3 and it does not fall within the category of an appealable order.
Bengal Water Ways Ltd vs IWTA 46 DLR 179.
Section 3-
Execution case-Striking out execution case after repeal of section 47 CPC – An objection by heirs of the deceased judgment debtor cannot be entertained after repeal of section 4 7 CPC-After the repeal of section 4 7 of the Code the limited jurisdiction vested in the executing court to decide the question of execution, discharge and satisfaction of the decree has been taken away to save the decree holder from the misery of facing unlimited number of objections against execution of the decree and thereby delaying the execution of the decree indefinitely. Impugned order is liable to be set aside and execution to be proceeded with in accordance with law.
Tripura Modern Bank Ltd vs Sunil Kumar 43 DLR 460.
Sections 3 and 15-
The acquisition proceedings are a colourable exercise of power as they were started without any agreement with the requiring body under section 15 of the Ordinance and for circumventing a valid decree of the Civil Court.
Sankar Gopal vs Addi Commissioner Dhaka 41DLR326.
Section 4-
The Chittagong Hill Tracts Regulation, which is a special law and since there is specific bar, the procedures in Civil Procedure Code will not be applicable.
Bangladesh Forest Industries Development Corporation and others vs Sheikh Abdul Jabbar 53 DLR 488
Sections 4 and 9-
Facts relating to the claim of Trade Union to enforce its right to contest election for Bargaining Agent having not brought the case within the definition of industrial dispute to confer jurisdiction on Labour Court, Civil Court will have jurisdiction in the matter.
KPM Sramik Union vs Registrar of Trade Union 42 DLR 329.
Sections 4 and 9-
Provision in the special law is not affected by provision in the Code of Civil Procedure. Special Jaw must prevail over other laws.
Under section 9 of the Code, the Civil Court shall have jurisdiction to try all suits of civil nature excepting suits of which the cognisance is either expressly or impliedly barred. Section 4 of the Code provides that in the absence of any specific provision to the contrary, nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect any special law now in force or special jurisdiction or power conferred, or any special form of procedure prescribed by or under any other law for the time being in force. It appears from section 4 that the provision in the special law is not affected by the provision in the Code and that the provision in the special Jaw must prevail in the absence of any specific provision to the contrary.
Jalaluddin Ahmed vs Matiur Rahman Khan 41 DLR 77.
Sections 4 and 9-
The general remedy of the suit under section 9 of the Code will be impliedly barred where a right is created by a special Jaw and special forum is provided in it.
Sections 4 and 9 of the Code read together, therefore, indicate that where a right is created by a special Jaw and a method of enforcing the right is pointed out by the Jaw creating such right, the general remedy of suit under section 9 of the Code will be impliedly barred and the method provided by the special Jaw must be followed.
Jalaluddin Ahmed vs Matiur Rahman Khan 41 DLR 77.
Sections 4 & 9-
The jurisdiction of the Civil Court is impliedly barred in respect of the trial of election disputes.
In matters governed by the said Ordinance and said Rules the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is impliedly barred. In creating the special forum that is, the Election Tribunal with exclusive jurisdiction to deal with election disputes, the intention of the Legislature seems to have been that defeated candidate who goes to the Election Tribunal impeaching the election would be in a jurisdiction or malafide or not in accordance with law.
Motiul Hoque vs DIT (R4JUK) 43 DLR 407.
Sections 4 & 9-
When administrative authority or statutory tribunal is vested with jurisdiction to decide a matter on consideration of materials placed before it, such authority can either accept the materials or reject the same. The trial Court acted illegally in passing the impugned decree holding that the order of the Collector of Customs was ultra vires and without jurisdiction.
Bangladesh & another vs Banarashi Lal Sharal & ors. 45 DLR 669.
Section 9-
Suits which a Court is barred to try-Under section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure any Civil Court has jurisdiction, "to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognisance is either expressly or impliedly barred".
Nur Muhammad vs Mainuddin 39 DLR (AD) 1.
Section 9-
Ouster of jurisdiction is not to be readily inferred.
Habibur Rahman vs Election Commission 40 DLR 459.
Section 9-
The suit building was included in the list published in the official Gazette in contravention of section 5(1 )(a)(b) of the Ordinance and as such the Civil Court had jurisdiction to try the suit. The Court clearly fell into error in holding that because of inclusion of the building in the official Gazette the suit was not maintainable.
Md Zaher vs Bangladesh 42 DLR 430.
Section 9-
Ouster of Court's jurisdiction to try a suit-the ouster of Court's jurisdiction is not to be readily inferred. Even when there is an express ouster, the court shall retain its jurisdiction if the order passed is without position to agitate before the Tribunal in a properly framed election petition the pre-election controversies materially affecting the result of the election.
Mostafa Kamal vs BD Habibullah 41 DLR 197.
Section 9-
The suit falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Small Cause Courts Judge but erroneously tried by a court other than the sec Judge suffers from no legal infirmity and the trial cannot be vitiated. Section 23 of the Small Cause Courts Act negatives the proposition that section 16 of the Act altogether deprives the civil Court of the jurisdiction conferred by section 9 of the Code in respect of the small causes suit.
Wahida Rashid vs Miran Muhammad Zahidul Hoque 43 DLR 115.
Section 9-
Decree by civil Court- whether Court of Settlement is competent to disturb it-The decree is binding on the Government until it is set aside by a court of competent jurisdiction. A party to the suit cannot say that an agreement, which was the basis of the suit, was forged. The Court of Settlement has no power to set aside a decree of the civil Court but it has the jurisdiction only to decide the matter on the basis of papers produced and so the decree stands against the Government.
Rahela Khatun vs Court of Settlement 45 DLR 5.
Section 9-
Exclusion of jurisdiction of a civil Court should not be readily inferred. If the order passed or action taken by any authority is malafide, such court shall have jurisdiction to entertain a suit to see whether the action is in conformity with the law in question.
Soleman Bibi and ors. vs Administrator, Farajikandi Complex and ors. 45 DLR 727.
Section 9-
Decision of the civil Court with regard to the nature of the property and also the plaintiffs claim thereto is not only binding upon the present petitioner but also upon the Court of Settlement.
Moinuddin (Md) vs The People's Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary Ministry of Works 48 DLR (AD) 56.
Section 9-
Even if jurisdiction is excluded still then the civil Courts have jurisdiction to examine as to whether the provisions of an Act have been duly complied with or to examine as to whether a statutory tribunal has acted in conformity with the fundamental principles of judicial procedure.
Shahidullah (Md) vs Abdus Sobhan Talukder 49 DLR 248.
Section 9-
The jurisdiction of the Court is conferred by law and it never depends upon the consent of the parties. It is thus evident that the Assistant Judge acted illegally and without jurisdiction in passing the impugned decree.
Rokeya Begum vs Md Abdur Rahman alias Ganda being dead his heirs : 1(a) Md Abdul Barik and others 50 DLR 271.
Section 9-
When alternative remedies are available to a party, it is open to him to prefer any one or more of his choice and he cannot be compelled to have recourse to a particular remedy.
Narayanganj High School and others vs Pran Ballave Saha Banik and others 52 DLR 90.
Section 9-
Since fraud has been alleged by the plaintiffs in auction of their suit land and they were not made parties in the auction proceedings, the party affected by auction sale can take shelter of the Civil Court.
Parul Bala @Parul Rani Shah Mondol vs Suruj Miah and others 53 DLR 481.
Section 9-
Under this section a person is entitled to institute a suit for possession when he was dispossessed of immovable property otherwise than in due course of law.
Shan Hosiery vs Bangladesh Jatiya Shamabaya Shilpa Samity Ltd and others 54 DLR 291
Section 9-
lt cannot be the intention of the legislature that when an award was made in the name of wrong person, through collusion or otherwise, the rightful owner of such property will have no remedy under the general law to establish his title to the compensation as awarded.
Animal Protection Society, Chittagong vs Laxman Chadra Das and ors 56 DLR 522.
Sections 9 & 4-
When administrative authority or statutory tribunal is vested with jurisdiction to decide a matter on condideration of materials placed before it, such authority can either accept the materials or reject the same. The trial Court acted illegally in passing the impugned decree holding that the order of the Collector of Customs was ultra vires and without jurisdiction.
Bangladesh and another vs Banarashi Lal Sharaf and others 45 DLR 669.
Sections 9 & 115-
The provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure are not applicable in the Chittagong Hill Tracts.
Bangladesh Forest Industries Development Corporation and others vs Sheikh Abdul Jabbar 53 DLR 488.
Sections 9 & 115-
Any aggrieved party against the decision of the Divisional Commissioner in civil matters can maintain an application under Article 102 of the Constitution and not a revision petition under Section 115(1) CPC.
Bangladesh Forest Industries Development Corporation and others vs Sheikh Abdul Jabbar 53 DLR 488.
Section 9 & Order VII rule 11(d)-
In view of the case-law reported in 41 DLR 77, the general remedy of the suit under section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure is barred by section 102 of the Waqfs Ordinance and clause ( d) of rule 11 of Order VII CPC appears to be applicable in the matter.
Shah Newaz (Md) & ors vs Shah Wali and another 54 DLR 375
Section 9 and Order VII, rule II-
The jurisdiction of the Civil Court to try all disputes of civil nature under section 9 of the Code cannot be taken away lightly-it can be so done only when it is specifically barred under any law.
Hilly Housing Co-operative Society Ltd vs Akhtaruzzaman Chowdhury and ors 54 DLR 46.
Section 9 & Order VII rule 11(d)-
The aggrieved member of the trade organisation must exhaust his remedies by way of reference to an Arbitration Tribunal before invoking the aid of the Civil Court.
Shaikh Ansar Ali & others vs Md Tofazzal Hossain and others 55 DLR 211.
Section 10—
An order for simultaneously hearing and disposal of two suits-should not be passed as a matter of course.
Bangladesh Shilpa Bank vs Bangladesh Hotels Ltd 38 DLR (AD) 70.
Section 10—
Meaning of the expression "matter in issue"-If refers to the entire subject in controversy between the parties-All matters in issue in the two suits should be identical-Court cannot apply this section where there are some issues in common and other are different issues.
Abdur Razzaque Dhali vs Ashrafun Nessa 37 DLR 271.
Section 10—
The special proceedings under special law (PO No. 129 of 1972) shall proceed independently under the provisions of that special law irrespective of whether there is any other pending proceeding under any other ordinary law instituted earlier or later than the special proceeding-Section 10 CPC shall not be attracted to the two proceedings even though subject matter and parties may be the same.
Ahmad Silk Mills Ltd vs Bangladesh Shilpa Bank 42 DLR 140.
Section 10—
The House Rent Controller having dismissed the petitioner's cases under section 19 of the Rent Control Ordinance the latter preferred Misc. Appeals before the District Judge against the dismissal and prayed for stay of the proceedings of sec suits against him pending disposal of the appeals. It is held in such circumstance that the point at issue before the House Rent Controller and the SCC Judge are distinct and different and, as such, there is no question of granting stay.
Sheikh Mohd Salimullah vs Shafiqul Alam 43 DLR 113.
Section 10-
The matter in issue in the previously instituted suit and in the subsequent one is the material consideration under section 10 CPC, not the relief sought for in the suits.
Altaf Hossain vs Abbas Ali 45 DLR 374.
Section 10—
The Court cannot apply this section when some issues are common and other issues are different.
Mazharul Haque Quraishi vs Giridhari Rishi and others 51DLR149.
Section 10—
As both the suits are over the selfsame subject-matter and both by the same parties and the suits were filed in two different courts, in all fairness the suits as well as the injunction matter should be heard by the same court.
Khaleda Rahman & another vs Integrated Services Limited and ors 53 DLR 161
Section 10—
Having regard to the facts that both the parties are litigating about the same suit land for a decree of declaration it is desirable that both the suits be tried analogously by the same Court.
Nurujjaman and others (Md) vs Md Sajjad Ali and others 56 DLR 149 .
Section 10 & Order IX rule 9-
A miscellaneous case under Order IX rule 9 of the Code is not a continuation of the suit for the pendency of which further proceedings of an execution case can be stayed.
Nurul Islam (Md) and others vs Md Maniruddin Bepari and others 49DLR 351.
Sections 10, 11and141 and Order 39, rule 1-
The Family Court constituted under the Family Courts Ordinance (XVIII of 1985) cannot grant temporary injunction under Order XXXIX, rule 1 CPC in view of the bar of section 20 of the Family Courts Ordinance No. 18 of 1985.
Maqbul Ahmed vs Sufia Khatun 40 DLR 305.
Sections 10 & 151-
Provision of section 10 of the Code is mandatory-But this provision will not take away the right conferred upon this court under section 151 of the Code on the facts and circumstances of a given case to secure the ends of justice.
Messrs Ayat Ali Bhuiyan vs Janata Bank 40 DLR 56.
Sections 10 & 151-
Analogous Trial-The principle of consolidation of suits for trial implies that similarity of identity of the matter in issue in different suits by the same party should be decided by the court once and for all. The object of consolidation is to avoid multiplicity of litigations between the same parties whenever the matter in issue is substantially or directly the same. The principle of consolidation in no way conflicts with the purpose of section l 0 CPC, on the contrary it preserves and promotes it.
Rezaul Karim vs Jahanara Begum 44 DLR 508.
Section 10, Or. VII r.11 & Or. IX r.9 –
Fresh suit-Same cause of action-Since two suits were filed one after another upon the same cause of action, the later suit ought to have been stayed. The later suit having been brought before the dismissal of the Title Suit No. 210of1981 the bar of Order IX rule 9 has no manner of application in the present case.
Hajee Abdul Latif vs Abdul Huq & others 44 DLR 601.