Home > Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 > Sections 9, 10 and 11

Sections 9, 10 and 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Sections 9, 10 and 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) deal with the jurisdiction of Civil Courts, stay of suit, and the doctrine of res judicata.

Legal text reviewed: September 6, 2026. The central provisions below should be read with applicable State amendments, local laws and binding judicial decisions.
Section 9 CPC

Courts to try all civil suits unless barred

The Courts shall, subject to the provisions herein contained, have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred.

Explanation I. A suit in which the right to property or to an office is contested is a suit of a civil nature, notwithstanding that such right may depend entirely on the decision of questions as to religious rites or ceremonies.

Explanation II. For the purposes of this section, it is immaterial whether or not any fees are attached to the office referred to in Explanation I or whether or not such office is attached to a particular place.

In brief: Section 9 gives Civil Courts general jurisdiction over suits of a civil nature unless that jurisdiction is expressly or impliedly barred.

Maharashtra amendment relating to Section 9A

Section 9A of the Code, as applicable in Maharashtra, was deleted by the Code of Civil Procedure (Maharashtra Amendment) Act, 2018 (Maharashtra Act 61 of 2018).

Transitional provisions accompanied that deletion. The uploaded page records, among other matters, provisions concerning pending preliminary issues, pending revisions or appeals arising from decisions on jurisdiction, and ad-interim orders made before deletion.

The Code of Civil Procedure (Maharashtra Amendment) (Amendment) Act, 2018 (Maharashtra Act 72 of 2018) further substituted clause (1) of section 3 of the 2018 Amendment Act with retrospective effect from June 27, 2018, providing that a preliminary issue framed under Section 9A and pending on commencement of the Amendment Act shall be decided and disposed of under Section 9A as if Section 9A had not been deleted.

For Maharashtra matters, the exact transitional provisions and subsequent judicial interpretation should be checked before relying on Section 9A procedure.

Section 10 CPC

Stay of suit

No Court shall proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is also directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title, where such suit is pending in the same or any other Court in India having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed, or in any Court beyond the limits of India established or continued by the Central Government and having like jurisdiction, or before the Supreme Court.

Explanation. The pendency of a suit in a foreign Court does not preclude the Courts in India from trying a suit founded on the same cause of action.

In brief: Section 10 prevents simultaneous trial of a later suit when the directly and substantially same matter is already pending between the same parties or their privies under the same title before a competent Court.
Section 11 CPC

Res judicata

No Court shall try any suit or issue in which the matter directly and substantially in issue has been directly and substantially in issue in a former suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim, litigating under the same title, in a Court competent to try such subsequent suit or the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised, and has been heard and finally decided by such Court.

Explanations to Section 11

  1. Explanation I. The expression "former suit" denotes a suit which has been decided prior to the suit in question, whether or not it was instituted prior thereto.
  2. Explanation II. The competence of a Court is determined irrespective of any provisions as to a right of appeal from the decision of such Court.
  3. Explanation III. The matter referred to must in the former suit have been alleged by one party and either denied or admitted, expressly or impliedly, by the other.
  4. Explanation IV. Any matter which might and ought to have been made a ground of defence or attack in the former suit is deemed to have been directly and substantially in issue in that suit.
  5. Explanation V. Any relief claimed in the plaint which is not expressly granted by the decree is deemed to have been refused.
  6. Explanation VI. Where persons litigate bona fide in respect of a public right or a private right claimed in common for themselves and others, all persons interested in such right are deemed to claim under the persons so litigating.
  7. Explanation VII. Section 11 applies to proceedings for execution of a decree, and references to a suit, issue or former suit are construed accordingly in relation to execution proceedings.
  8. Explanation VIII. An issue heard and finally decided by a Court of limited jurisdiction competent to decide that issue operates as res judicata in a subsequent suit, even if that Court was not competent to try the later suit as a whole.
In brief: Section 11 bars re-litigation of matters already directly and substantially in issue between the same parties or their privies when those matters have been heard and finally decided by a competent Court.

Important amendment notes

Official references: Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - India Code; Maharashtra Law and Judiciary Department - 2018 amendment documents.