Pecuniary Jurisdiction under Section 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Pecuniary Jurisdiction under Section 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Section 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 the deals with pecuniary jurisdiction and provides as follows :

# 6. Pecuniary jurisdiction

Save in so far as is otherwise expressly provided, nothing herein contained shall operate to give any Court jurisdiction over suits the amount or value of the subject-matter of which exceeds the pecuniary limits (if any) of its ordinary jurisdiction.


Pecuniary jurisdiction refers to the jurisdiction of a court over a suit based on the amount or value of its subject matter.

A plaintiff may not split up one cause of action so as to bring two suits in a Court of limited pecuniary jurisdiction, but he may abandon any surplus, and have his suit for the balance, within the PecuniaryJurisdiction of such Court, tried and decided by it.

In no case can a Court of restricted pecuniary jurisdiction try or decree a suit of which the subject-matter exceeds in value its PecuniaryJurisdiction so restricted. [Hirjibhai Navroji Anklesaria vs. Jamshedji Nassarwanji Ginvalla [Bombay High Court, 24 June 1913]

The decree, though of limited pecuniary jurisdiction, would operate as res judicata in the subsequent suit between he same parties. [Sulochana Amma vs Narayanan Nair, AIR 1994 SC 152, (1994) 2 SCC 14]

The Code of Civil Procedure has made a distinction between lack of inherent jurisdiction and objection to territorial jurisdiction and pecuniary jurisdiction.

Whereas, an inherent lack of jurisdiction may make a decree passed by that court one without jurisdiction or void in law, a decree passed by a court lacking territorial jurisdiction or pecuniary jurisdiction does not automatically become void.

No objection to the pecuniary jurisdiction of the court could be raised successfully even in an appeal against that very decree unless it had been raised at the earliest opportunity and a failure of justice or prejudice was shown. [Subhash Mahadevasa Habib v. Nemasa Ambasa Dharamdas, (2007) 13 SCC 650 : JT 2007 (5) SC 12 : AIR 2007 SC 1828 : 2007 (3) CivCC 488 : 2007(5) Scale 34 : 2007 (4) SCR 150 : 2007 AIR (SCW) 3044 : 2007(6) MLJ 992 : 2007(4) Air Kar R 277 : 2008(1) W.L.C. 110 : 2007(4) CTC 232 : 2007(4) ALL MR 324 : 2007(2) R.C.R.(Civil) 662 : 2007(2) Recent Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 213]


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *