9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Jurisdiction of the City Civil Court to entertain the suit. 2. Interpretation of "relating to" or "arising out of" mortgages under Item 7 of the First Schedule of the City Civil Courts Act, 1953. 3. Validity of the mortgage decree and its implications. Detailed Analysis: 1. Jurisdiction of the City Civil Court to entertain the suit: The plaintiffs instituted a suit in the City Civil Court, Calcutta, seeking a declaration that a mortgage decree passed by the High Court was void and not binding on them due to fraud. They also sought a permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from executing the decree. The defendants contended that the City Civil Court lacked pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the suit, which should have been valued at above Rs. 30,000, the amount of the mortgage decree. They further argued that under Section 5(4) and Item 7 of the First Schedule of the City Civil Courts Act, the court had no jurisdiction to try the suit. The trial court upheld the defendants' contention, stating that the suit related to or arose out of the mortgage of immovable property, and directed the return of the plaint for presentation to the proper court. The plaintiffs appealed this decision. 2. Interpretation of "relating to" or "arising out of" mortgages under Item 7 of the First Schedule of the City Civil Courts Act, 1953: The plaintiffs' advocate argued that after the passing of a mortgage decree, the original relationship between the parties as lender and borrower ends, and the relationship becomes that of judgment-debtor and judgment-creditor. Therefore, a suit to declare a mortgage decree void would not relate to or arise out of a mortgage within the meaning of Item 7 of the First Schedule. The court examined the phrases "relating to" and "arising out of," noting their comprehensiveness. It cited various cases to illustrate that these phrases include any matter that may directly or indirectly relate to the subject in question. The court concluded that suits which either directly or indirectly relate to or arise out of mortgages fall within the scope of Item 7 of the First Schedule. 3. Validity of the mortgage decree and its implications: The court considered whether the relationship between the plaintiffs and the defendants as mortgagors and mortgagees ended with the mortgage decree and whether the decree was validly obtained. It determined that if the decree were set aside, the mortgage would revive; if not, the relationship would remain as judgment-debtors under the mortgage decree. The court concluded that the suit ultimately related to the mortgage, thus falling within the scope of Item 7 of the First Schedule. Conclusion: The court held that the City Civil Court was correct in determining that the suit fell within the scope of Item 7 of the First Schedule of the City Civil Courts Act, 1953, and in returning the plaint for presentation to the proper court. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and no order for costs was made in this appeal.
|
