Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 · Chapter I: Suits in General · Place of suing
Section 20: Other suits to be instituted where defendants reside or cause of action arises
In plain words
Other suits must be filed where the defendant, or each defendant, lives, carries on business or works for gain, or where any defendant does so (with the court's leave or the others' acquiescence), or where the cause of action arises wholly or partly.
- A company is treated as carrying on business at its principal office in India, or at a subordinate office for causes of action arising there.
Example: B in Delhi buys goods through his agent from A in Calcutta, delivered in Calcutta. A may sue B for the price in Calcutta or Delhi.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Official text
Subject to the limitations aforesaid, every suit shall be instituted in a Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction
(a) the defendant, or each of the defendants where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of the suit, actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain; or
(b) any of the defendants, where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of the suit, actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain, provided that in such case either the leave of the Court is given, or the defendants who do not reside, or carry on business, or personally works for gain, as aforesaid, acquiesce in such institution; or
(c)The cause of action, wholly or in part, arises.
**** *
[Explanation].— A corporation shall be deemed to carry on business at its sole or principal office in [India] or, in respect of any cause of action arising at any place where it has also a subordinate office, at such place.
Illustrations
(a) A is a tradesman in Calcutta, B carries on business in Delhi. B, by his agent in Calcutta, buys goods of A and requests A to deliver them to the East Indian Railway Company. A delivers the goods accordingly in Calcutta. A may sue B for the price of the goods either in Calcutta, where the cause of action has arisen, or in Delhi, where B carries on busines.
(b) A resides at Simla, B at Calcutta and C at Delhi. A, B and C being together at Benaras, B and C make a joint promissory note payable on demand, and deliver it to A. A may sue B and C at Benaras, where the cause of action arose. He may also sue them at Calcutta, where B resides, or at Delhi, where C resides; but in each of these cases, if the non-resident defendant objects, the suit cannot proceed without the leave of the Court.
Source: India Code (indiacode.gov.in), the consolidated text published by the Legislative Department, Government of India. Text as updated on India Code on 15 October 2026. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 20
-
Rakesh Kumar Verma v. HDFC Bank Ltd.
Issue arose whether civil suits could have been instituted in courts in Patna and Delhi by employees in view of the specific clauses in the appointment letter that courts in Mumbai would have exclusive jurisdiction to…
-
Arcadia Shipping Ltd. v. Tata Steel Limited and Others
Whether the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court was correct in setting aside the finding of the Single Judge that the Delhi High Court has no territorial jurisdiction.
- M/S. Patil Automation Private Limited and Ors. v. Rakheja Engineers Private Limited
- Manish Kumar v. Union of India and Another
- Shanti Devi Alias Shanti Mishra v. Union of India & Ors.
- Karnataka State Pollution Control v. B. Heera Naik & Ors. Etc.
- Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd. v. K. S. Infraspace Llp & Anr.
- Cement Workers’ Mandal v. Global Cements Ltd. (Hmp Cements Ltd.) & Ors
- Shivnarayan (D) by Lrs. v. Maniklal (D) Thr. Lrs. & Ors.
- Ahmed Abdulla Ahmed Al Ghurair (Through Their Power of Attorney Holder Mr. Bartholomew Kamya) & Anr. v. Star Health and Allied Insurance Company Limited & Ors.
- Board of Control for Cricket in India v. Kochi Cricket Pvt. Ltd. and Etc.
- Terapalli Dyvasahata Kumar v. S.M. Kantha Raju (Dead) Thr. Lrs. & Anr.
- Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd. v. Sanjay Dalia&Anr.
- M/S. Bhandari Udyog Limited v. Industrial Facilitation Council and Anr.
- Nawal Kishore Sharma v. Union of India and Others
- Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.
- Enercon (India) Ltd. & Ors. v. Enercon Gmbh & Anr.
- World Sport Group (Mauritius) Ltd. v. Msm Satellite (Singapore) Pte. Ltd.
- Executive Engineer, Road Development Division No.Ill, Panvel & Anr. v. Atlanta Limited
- M/S. Paragon Rubber Industries v. M/S. Pragathi Rubber Mills & Ors.
- M/S. Swastik Gases P. Ltd. v. Indian Oil Corp. Ltd.
- Sinnamani & Anr. v. G. Vettivel and Ors.
- A.V.M. Sales Corporation v. M/S. Anuradha Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.
- M/S. Godrej Sara Lee Limited v. Reckitt Benckiser Australia Pty. Ltd. and Anr.
- Sri Jeyaram Educational Trust and Ors. v. A.G. Syed Mohideen and Ors.
- Balaji Coke Industry Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S Mm Bhagwati Coke (Guj) Pvt. Ltd.
- Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd. v. Hong Kong & Shanghai Banking Corporation
- M/S. Shakti Bhog Foods Limited v. Kola Shipping Limited
- Arjan Singh v. Punit Ahluwalia & Ors.
- Laxman Prasad v. Prodigy Electronics Ltd. and Anr.
- Mohannakumaran Nair v. Vijayakumaran Nair
- Sandeep Polymers Pvt.Ltd. v. Bajaj Auto Ltd. and Ors.
- M/S. Ambica Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise
- Jatinder v. M/S. Chopra Land Dev. P. Ltd. and Anr.
- Jindal Vijayanagar Steel (Jsw Steel Ltd.) v. Jindal Praxair Oxygen Company Ltd.
- Om Prakash Srivastava v. Union of India and Anr.
- M/S. Dhodha House v. S.K. Maingi
- M/S. Prem Chand Vijay Kumar v. Yash Pal Singh and Anr.
- State of Haryana v. State of Punjab and Anr.
- M/S. Kusum Ingots and Alloys Ltd. v. Union of India and Anr.
- New Moga Transport Company, Through Its Proprietor Krishanlal Jhanwar v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors.
- Dhannalal v. Kalawatibai and Ors.
- Navinchandra N. Majithia v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
- M.V. Al. Quamar v. Tsavliris Salvage (International) Ltd. and Ors.
- Khaleel Ahmed Dakhani v. The Hatti Gold Mines Co. Ltd.
- Sadanandan Bhadran v. Madhavan Sunil Kumar
- World Tanker Carrier Corporation v. Snp Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.
- M/S Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. M/S Indo Swiss Synthetics Gem Manufacturing Co. Ltd. and Ors.
- Rashtriya Chini Mills Adhikari Parishad, Lucknow v. The State of U.P. and Others
- M/S. Angile Insulations v. M/S. Davy Ashmore India Ltd. and Anr.
- Board of Trustees for the Port of Calcutta and Anr. v. Bombay Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.
- Subodh Kumar Gupta v. Shrikant Gupta and Ors.
- R. Mcdill and Company Pvt. Ltd. v. Gouri Sankar Sarda and Others
- Vijay Kumar Sharma & Ors. Etc. v. State of Karnataka & Ors. Etc.
- Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur v. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti and Anr.