CPC, 1908 · Part I · Place of Suing

Bar on suit to set aside decree on objection as to place of suing

Once a decree is passed, you cannot start a fresh suit to undo it on a place-of-suing ground.

§ 21A

How to read Section 21A

What it is about

§21 stops a late objection on appeal. §21A closes the other escape route — you cannot file a brand-new suit to have an earlier decree declared invalid just because it was passed in the wrong place.

A NEGATIVE bar

“No suit shall lie” — an absolute bar on a second, collateral suit founded on a place-of-suing objection.

Limited to place of suing

The bar applies only to place-of-suing grounds. A decree by a court wholly lacking jurisdiction (subject-matter) is a different matter.

The bare Act

21A. Bar on suit to set aside decree on objection as to place of suing.

No suit shall lie challenging the validity of a decree passed in a former suit between the same parties, or between the parties under whom they or any of them claim, litigating under the same title, on any ground based on an objection as to the place of suing.

Explanation.—The expression “former suit” means a suit which has been decided prior to the decision in the suit in which the validity of the decree is questioned, whether or not the previously decided suit was instituted prior to the suit in which the validity of such decree is questioned.

The main provision — phrase by phrase

The barNo suit shall lie challenging the validity of a decreeAn absolute prohibition on bringing a fresh, independent suit whose object is to have an existing decree declared invalid.Negative rule

Which decreepassed in a former suitThe decree under attack is one from a former suit — defined in the Explanation as a suit decided earlier.Scope

Between whombetween the same parties, or between the parties under whom they or any of them claim, litigating under the same titleThe same parties or their privies, suing in the same capacity — the familiar res judicata language (cf. §11).Parties / privity

On what groundon any ground based on an objection as to the place of suingThe bar bites only where the challenge rests on a place-of-suing objection — not on other defects.Limited ground

The Explanation — what “former suit” means

Defines“former suit” means a suit which has been decided prior to the decision in the suit in which the validity of the decree is questioned“Former” is measured by the date of DECISION — the suit whose decree was decided first.Definition

Clarifieswhether or not the previously decided suit was instituted prior to the suit in which the validity of such decree is questionedIt does not matter which suit was filed first — only which was decided first. The order of institution is irrelevant.Clarification

Picture the bar

A decree is passed in Suit 1. The losing party, instead of appealing, files Suit 2 arguing “the Suit 1 court was the wrong place.” §21A says Suit 2 will not lie. The proper — and only — route was to object in time under §21.

Why? To protect the finality of decrees and to stop litigants re-opening settled matters through a collateral suit on a purely technical place-of-suing point.

§21 and §21A together

§21Blocks a late objection

Within the same litigation — an appellate / revisional court won’t entertain a place / pecuniary / execution objection raised too late or without failure of justice.

§21ABlocks a fresh suit

In a new litigation — no separate suit lies to set aside the decree on a place-of-suing ground.

Both were inserted / recast by the Amendment Act 104 of 1976 to curb delaying tactics and protect finality — the policy also in §99 and Kiran Singh v. Chaman Paswan (AIR 1954 SC 340).

Connected rules & sections

§ 21

Objections to jurisdiction

Its companion — bars the late objection that §21A’s fresh suit would try to revive.

§ 11

Res judicata

§21A borrows its “same parties … same title” language and reinforces finality.

§§ 15–20

Place of suing

The very objection §21A forbids using as a ground to upset a decree.

§ 99

No decree reversed for technical defect

Same finality policy — non-prejudicial errors do not undo decrees.

Note

Inherent lack of jurisdiction

§21A does not save a decree by a court with no subject-matter jurisdiction — that may still be a nullity.

1976

Amendment Act 104 of 1976

Inserted §21A into the Code.

← Place of Suing map
← §21 — objections
Next: §§22–25 — transfer of suits