9911796707
TMI Blog1977 (8) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e decree in the City Civil Court and sought for its execution. 3. A notice under Order 21, Rule 22, having been issued the same was resisted by the defendants-respondents on several grounds. None of those grounds found favour with the learned Judge with the result he made the notice under Order 21, Rule 22 absolute by his order dated 17th February 1976. 4. Soon thereafter the defendant-respondents filed an application on the 3rd March 1976 for a review of the order dated 17th February 1976. Among other grounds the review was sought on the ground that having regard to the provisions of Section 44A read with Section 2(4) of the Civil P. C. the City Civil Court had no jurisdiction to execute the decree and that it is only the High Court on its Original Side which could execute the decree. This contention found favour with the learned Judge and, he, therefore, set aside his earlier order dated 17th February 1976 and discharged the notice under Order 21, Rule 22 of the Civil P. C. 5. It is the correctness of that order which is challenged by the plaintiff decree-holder by this appeal, 6. Mr. Muchhala, learned Advocate for the appellant has assailed the order of the learned J ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or (b) by the High Court for the relief of insolvent debtors, or (c) by the High Court under any special law other than the Letters Patent, or (d) by the Smell Cause Courts Provided that the State Govt. may, from time to time, after consultation with the High Court, by a like notification extend the jurisdiction of the City Civil Court to any suits or proceedings which are cognizable by the High Court as a Court having testamentary or intestate jurisdiction or for the relief of insolvent debtors. 12. Section 4 provides that : Subject to the exceptions specified in Section 3, the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, invest the City Court with jurisdiction to receive, try and dispose of all suits and other proceedings of a civil nature arising within the Greater Bombay and of such value not exceeding twenty-five thousand rupee as may be specified in the notification. 13. A notification dated 20th January 1950 bearing No. 2346/V, published in the Bombay Government Gazette Part IV-B at page 165, extended the jurisdiction of the City Civil Court to ₹ 25,000/-. 14. Section 12 of the Act provides as under: Notwithstanding anythi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issed the suits on the preliminary ground that the suits were not entertainable by the said Court. The suits were obviously under Section 62 of the Copyright Act and, under that section, such suits have to be instituted in the district Court having jurisdiction . For the meaning of the expression District Court one has to turn to Section 2(4) of the C.P.C. and, on the question of jurisdiction, the immediately relevant sections which were considered were Sections 19 and 20 of the Code. It was observed that the Copyright Act in Sub-section (2) of Section 62, contains an extension of that jurisdiction. The Court observed that it is clear from the above that, in order that the City Civil Court would be entitled to entertain the present suits under the above law, it must be a district court having jurisdiction within the meaning of Sub-section (1) of Section 62, read with or in the light of Section 2(4) of the Civil P. C. and the relevant jurisdictional provisions, as mentioned hereinbefore. The Court therefore observed that the immediate enquiry, would be whether the City Civil Court would, in the instant case, satisfy the above test. In para 7, the Court observed that the point, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said Section 5. Clearly, therefore, the change, introduced by the City Civil Court Act to the relevant law, as noticed above, would make the City Civil Court, for purposes of the present suits, the principal civil court of original jurisdiction within the local limits whereof the defendants reside and the plaintiff also carries an business. From this point of view also, the City Civil Court will be the court in which the present suits ought to be filed. 21. With respect the above observations support my view that having regard to the provisions of Section 12 of the Bombay City Civil Court Act, 1948, read with the notification of 1950, issued under Section 4 of the Bombay City Civil Court Act 1948, it is the Bombay City Civil Court which is the principal court of original civil jurisdiction in respect of the matters covered by the notification of 1950, and, therefore, it would be the District Court referred to in Section 44A of the Civil P. C. 22. Clearly therefore the learned Judge was in error when without taking into consideration the effect of the provisions of Sections 4 and 12 of the Bombay City Civil Court Act, 1948, he concluded that the City Civil Court at Bom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the city limits, it can be deemed to be a District Court, in those cases where resort to the definition in Section 2(4) of the Civil P. C., is permissible for the purpose of fixing jurisdiction. Section 9 of the Civil P. C, gives power to every Civil Court to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognisance is either expressly or impliedly barred, and the explanation to that section says that a suit in which the right to property or to an office is contested is a suit of civil nature. It is well recognised that copyright is property, and therefore, a suit seeking reliefs for infringement of copyright is a suit of a civil nature. If such infringement occurs, and the cause of action for a suit based on the infringement arises within the area of the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of the High Court, that Court can be deemed to be a District Court as per definition in Section 2(4) of the Civil P. C. and will have power to try the suit. 26. This judgment also is not relevant for our purpose. That was not at all a case where it was or could have been contended that the City Civil Court at Madras was the district court within the meaning of Section 2(4) o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
