The Full Bench addressed whether a Trial Court, under Section 9-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), can frame an issue that disposes of a suit or cause of action in part. The background involves a suit where the plaintiffs challenged a sale deed and sought a permanent injunction. Defendants requested to frame a preliminary issue on limitation. The Trial Court did so, but the plaintiffs contested this order. The Single Judge, disagreeing with a prior Division Bench decision, referred the question to the Full Bench. The Full Bench concluded that under Section 9-A, the Trial Court cannot frame an issue that disposes of a suit or cause of action in part; it must address the entire suit.

Introduction

Question of Law: Whether the Trial Court, under Section 9-A of the CPC, can frame an issue that disposes of a suit or cause of action in part.

Background

Facts:

• Plaintiffs filed Regular Civil Suit No.45 of 2011 for a declaration that a sale deed dated 2 August 1965 was illegal and sought a permanent injunction against dispossession.
• Defendants requested the Trial Court to frame a preliminary issue on limitation.
• The Trial Court framed this issue under Section 9-A of the CPC.
• Plaintiffs challenged this order via a writ petition.

Referral to Full Bench

The Single Judge disagreed with the Division Bench's view in Ferani Hotels Private Limited Vs. Nusli Nevile Wadia & Ors., which allowed for partial dismissal of a suit under Section 9-A. The Chief Justice referred the question to the Full Bench.

Submissions

Petitioners' Argument:

• Argued that with the amendment deleting Section 9-A, the issue need not be answered.
• Even if the suit is barred by limitation, the relief of permanent injunction would still survive.
• Hence, Section 9-A should not allow framing issues that do not dispose of the entire suit.

Defendants' Argument:

• Asserted that the Trial Court can frame a preliminary issue under Section 9-A to dispose of the suit partly.

Effect of Repeal of Section 9-A

Clause (3) of the Repealing Act: Preliminary issues framed under Section 9-A pending commencement of the 2018 Amendment are to be decided under Order XIV of the CPC.

Supreme Court Decision in Nusli Neville Wadia Vs. Ivory Properties: Clarified that the repeal did not change the legal scenario of deciding preliminary issues under Section 9-A.

Purpose of Section 9-A

Historical Context:

• Introduced to address interim reliefs granted without determining jurisdiction.
• Ensured jurisdictional objections were resolved at the outset.

Amendments and Re-introductions:

• Re-introduced in 1977 to prioritize jurisdictional clarity before granting interim relief.

Conclusion

Key Points:

• The term "suit" in Section 9-A refers to the entire legal action, not part of it.
• Jurisdictional issues must address the entire suit.
• Trial Court cannot frame an issue that disposes of part of the suit or cause of action.

Final Answer: The Trial Court, under Section 9-A of the CPC, is not competent to frame an issue that disposes of the suit or cause of action in part. The matter is sent back to the Single Judge for a decision in accordance with this ruling.