The Supreme Court recently ruled on a case involving Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), emphasizing the importance of adhering to procedural requirements when filing suits against the government or public officers.
“A defect of jurisdiction strikes at the very authority of the court to pass any decree, and such a defect cannot be cured even by consent of parties.” – Supreme Court of India addressed pivotal issues concerning the maintainability of a civil suit against a State Financial Corporation, the applicability of mandatory notice under Section 80 CPC, the scope of the repealed Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993, and the jurisdiction of executing courts.
The Court set aside all orders and decrees against the appellant (OSFC), declared the decree as a nullity for want of jurisdiction and non-compliance with Section 80 CPC, and directed refund of the entire sum (over Rs. 2.92 crores) recovered from the Corporation.
“It is a fundamental principle well established that a decree passed by a court without jurisdiction is a nullity and that its invalidity could be set up whenever and it is sought to be enforced or relied upon, even at the stage of execution and even in collateral proceedings.”
