This law is even termed as “adjective law”. In the handling of the corporate business. The civil procedure code consolidates and amends the law relating to the procedure of the courts of civil jurisdiction.
A. This is a general law.
B. The code doesn’t affect any special or local laws nor does it supersede any special jurisdiction or power conferred .
Monopolies and Restrictive Trade practices Act, 1969 and the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade practices Commission Regulations 1991 have adopted various relevant provision of the code, while provisions of the code are not applicable for Regulation 50, 65 etc.
Rules and regulation
Thus CPC is divided into 2 parts:-
1. 158 sections from the first part
2. Rules and orders contained in schedule I from the second part.
The object of the Code generally is to create jurisdiction while the rules indicate the mode in which the jurisdiction should be exercised.
Structure of the civil courts:-
Section 3 of the civil procedure code lays down the structure of the codes in below manner:-
1. High court
2. District court
3. Civil courts
Jurisdiction of courts and Venue of suits:-
Jurisdiction means the authority by which a court has to decide matters that are brought before it for jurisdiction. The limit of the authority is imposed by the charter , statute , or a commission . A limitation on jurisdiction of a civil court may be of four kinds :-
1. Subject matter
2. Suing or Territorial jurisdiction
3. Jurisdiction over persons ( Subject to foreign nationality and Ruler or representative )
4. Pecuniary jurisdiction depending on pecuniary value of the suit (Section 6 )
Stay of the suit:-
Section 10 provides that no court shall proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter is in issue is also directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties.
In such case the later suit should be stayed till the disposal of earlier suit. This is also called DOCTRINE OF RES SUB JUDICE
A suit was instituted by B co. alleging infringement by the C company by using trade names of medicine and selling the same in wrapper and carton of identical design with same color combination etc as that of B co. A subsequent suit was instituted in different court by the C. co against the B. co with the same allegation.
The court held that the subsequent suit should be stayed as simultaneous trial of the suit in different cases might result in conflicting decisions as issue involved in two suits was totally identical.
(M/s. wings Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. and others)
(M/s Swan Pharmaceuticals and others )