129/2017 H.C.A Nooruddin & others (Appellant) V/S M/s. S.I.T.E. Ltd. & others (Respondent)

129/2017 H.C.A Nooruddin & others (Appellant) V/S M/s. S.I.T.E. Ltd. & others (Respondent) Sindh High Court

Bench: Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jawad Akbar Sarwana Order Date: 11-JAN-24

So Section 21 CPC has its own comprehensive jurisprudence which could overview the original court`s proceedings. The ibid section is primarily for appellate/revisional court where an appeal is preferred apparently by the appellant defending the suit but one must not be misled by such language. The language is couched in such a way that for appellant, who defended the suit, some restrictions were imposed, before enabling the appellate court to take cognizance. It has, however, provided a legal frame for the trial court considering the nature of jurisdiction being objected. **Lack of territorial or pecuniary jurisdiction becomes a mere irregularity at a later stage, if not taken at the earliest which does not make a decree nullity and in fact if taken belatedly and successfully may lead to a failure of justice. ***The two jurisdictions of the appellate court have been established to have acted lawfully i.e. (i). In the first instance where on account of procedural illegality or irregularity, identified above for [a] & [b] kinds of jurisdiction not by way of inherent lack of jurisdiction, a litigant plaintiff is ousted and (ii). In a case of lack of inherent jurisdiction, the court continue to proceed with the matter which may have resulted in the failure of justice. For both these limbs, the appellate jurisdiction is available