CPC, 1908 · Part I · Place of Suing
Suits for compensation for wrongs to person or movables
Hurt or wronged across two cities? Sue where it happened — or where the wrongdoer is.
The bare Act
Where a suit is for compensation for wrong done to the person or to movable property, if the wrong was done within the local limits of the jurisdiction of one Court and the defendant resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain, within the local limits of the jurisdiction of another Court, the suit may be instituted at the option of the plaintiff in either of the said Courts.
(a) A, residing in Delhi, beats B in Calcutta. B may sue A either in Calcutta or in Delhi.
(b) A, residing in Delhi, publishes in Calcutta statements defamatory of B. B may sue A either in Calcutta or in Delhi.
How to read Section 19
It is a territorial rule for one family of suits: compensation for a wrong (a tort) done to a person (assault, false imprisonment, defamation…) or to movable property (damage, conversion…). Not immovable property — that is §16.
If the wrong happened in one court’s area, and the defendant lives / works / does business in another court’s area, the suit may be filed in either.
“At the option of the plaintiff” — the victim chooses which of the two courts is more convenient. A clear plaintiff-friendly forum rule.
The two-forum option
The court within whose local limits the wrong to the person / movable actually took place.
The court where the defendant resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain.
Section 19, phrase by phrase
The illustrations, pictured
A (Delhi) beats B in Calcutta. The wrong is in Calcutta; A resides in Delhi.
⇒ B may sue in Calcutta or Delhi.
A (Delhi) publishes defamatory statements of B in Calcutta. Wrong in Calcutta; A resides in Delhi.
⇒ B may sue in Calcutta or Delhi.
Where §19 sits among the forum rules
Land & buildings — sue where the property is.
Tort claims — sue where the wrong was done or where the defendant is.
The residual rule — defendant resides / works, or the cause of action arises.
The two Illustrations — each on its own tab
👑 A (Delhi) beats B in Calcutta — B may sue in either
Calcutta
Where the wrong (the beating) was done.
Delhi
Where the defendant A resides.
📰 A (Delhi) defames B in Calcutta — B may sue in either
Calcutta
Where the defamatory statements were published.
Delhi
Where the defendant A resides.
Connected rules & sections
Shares the resides / carries on business / works for gain connecting factors; covers suits §19 does not.
The contrast — §19 is for wrongs to the person or movables, never land.
Whichever of the two courts the plaintiff picks, the suit still starts at the right grade.
If the plaintiff picks wrong, the objection must be raised early + show failure of justice.
Since §19 gives a choice of courts, the defendant may seek transfer under §22.
§19 is the forum rule for tort suits — assault, defamation, conversion, damage to goods, etc.
Fixes the time limit within which the compensation suit must be filed.
The plaint must state the facts showing which court’s jurisdiction is invoked under §19.