- within Litigation and Mediation & Arbitration topic(s)
- in United States
- with readers working within the Law Firm industries
- within Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Intellectual Property and Environment topic(s)
The High Court of Delhi, by way of its judgment dated 25.03.2026 in the matter of Hanuman Prasad Sharma @ H.P. Sharma v. J. Mithyleshwar1, held that objections relating to territorial jurisdiction must be raised at the earliest opportunity, failing which the same are deemed to be waived in terms of Section 21 of CPC.
The issue before the court was whether an objection to territorial jurisdiction of the Trial Court could be raised at a later stage by way of an application under Order VII Rule 10 of CPC when such an objection had not been raised in the written statement or at the stage of framing of issues.
The court held that neither consent nor waiver can cure a defect arising from an inherent lack of jurisdiction. In contrast, territorial jurisdiction can be assumed by a court if the objection is waived by a party, in accordance with the principles laid down in Section 21 of CPC. Independently of Section 21 of CPC, a defendant may also waive an objection to territorial jurisdiction and would thereafter be precluded from raising it. Since no objection to territorial jurisdiction was raised in the written statement and no issue on this aspect was framed, the objection was deemed waived.
Footnote
1 FAO 290/2022.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
