CPC, 1908 · Part I · Place of Suing
Suits for immovable property situate within jurisdiction of different Courts
When one property straddles two or more courts — sue in any of them.
The bare Act
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.
How to read Section 17
§16 sends a property suit to the court where the property lies. But what if the property lies partly in one court’s area and partly in another’s? §17 solves that — it is a relaxation of §16 for property spread across different courts’ jurisdictions.
The suit may be instituted in any Court within whose local limits any portion of the property is situate. The plaintiff chooses — one suit, not one per court.
The court chosen must be competent in value — the entire claim (the whole subject-matter, not just the local portion) must be cognizable by it. Ties back to §6 pecuniary jurisdiction.
The scenario, in one picture
Because a portion lies in each court’s limits, the plaintiff may file the single suit in Court A, B, or C — whichever is convenient (so long as it can hear the whole claim).
Section 17, phrase by phrase
The proviso — a competence gate
Take the total value of the subject-matter of the suit — the entire property, across all the courts.
Its pecuniary jurisdiction (§6 + Civil Courts Act) must cover that full value.
If yes, that court can try the whole suit. If no, pick a court (with a portion) that can take the full value.
Example: a plot worth a total of ₹8,00,000 lies partly in Court A’s and partly in Court B’s limits. The suit may be filed in A or B — but only in a court whose pecuniary limit covers the full ₹8,00,000, not merely the slice within its area.
§16 vs §17 — at a glance
Sue in that court — the single court where the property is situate.
Sue in any one court a portion falls in — provided it can hear the whole value.
The Proviso — on its own (the value gate)
⚖️ You may pick a court — but it must fit the WHOLE claim
Property spans courts
The immovable property lies within different Courts’ local limits.
Pick any portion-court
Sue in any Court where a portion of the property is situate.
Value gate
That Court must be competent in value for the ENTIRE claim — not just the local portion.
Connected rules & sections
Property in one court’s limits goes to that court. §17 extends this to property spread over several.
The proviso turns on this — the court must be competent in value for the entire claim.
Among the courts a portion falls in, the suit still starts at the lowest competent grade.
The next problem — where it is doubtful in which court’s limits the property lies.
A wrong choice of forum must be taken early; it voids a decree only on failure of justice.
Decides how the value of the subject-matter is worked out for the proviso.
The plaint must identify the property — here, across the several jurisdictions.
For suits not about immovable property, the general §20 forum applies instead.