Notice Under Section 80 CPC
Presented By-
Chairab Batra
Judicial Magistrate,
District Uttarkashi.
Introduction
In India, A person can sue the government and its officials on infringement of his right.
Generally, for suing a person, there is no need of giving a notice prior to suit. But
According to section 80 of Civil Procedure Code (CPC), 1908, it is mandatory to give a
notice before filling a case against government or public officer to claim relief from
mishaps caused by the government or public officer in its official capacity. Section 80 of
CPC mandates that only after the expiration of two months of sending notice to the
government or public official, one can sue it. The duration of two months provides time
to the official for responding to the notice served to it. Thus, this section is an attempt by
the law makers to settle the matters in amicable and timely manner.
SECTION 80 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE
(CPC), 1908
The serving of notice under Section 80 of the CPC before suing the government or public
officer is mandatory and describes two types of cases:
(i) Suit against the government and
(ii) Suit against public officers in respect of acts done or purporting to be done by such
public officers in their official capacity.
This section is explicit and mandatory and admits of no exceptions. The language of this
section is imperative and absolutely debars a court from entertaining a suit instituted
without compliance with its provisions. If the provisions of the section are not complied
with, the plaint must be rejected under O. 7, iR. 11(d) of CPC. So the notice under Section
80(1) of CPC, 1908 is the first step in the ligation against government or public officer.
Section 80(1) of CPC, 1908
Section 80(1) of CPC, 1908 provides -
a.) In the case of a suit against the Central Government the notice should be delivered to, or left at
the office of secretary to that government except in the case against railways.
b.) In the case of a suit against the Central Government where it relates to railways, the notice must
be delivered to, or left at the office General Manager of that railways:
c.) in the case of Jammu and Kashmir, to the office of the chief secretary to that government or
any other officer authorized by that government in this behalf.
d.) If the suit is against any other government, to the office of a secretary to that government or the
collector of the district.
In the case of public officer, delivery to him at his office, stating the cause of action, the name,
description, and place of residence of the plaintiff and the relief which he claims, and the plaint
shall contain a statement that such notice has been so delivered or left.
Section 80(2) And 80(3) of CPC, 1908
Section 80(2) of CPC, 1908 provides exception to the sub-section (1), It exempt the court to
entertain a suit dealing with urgent or immediate relief against the government on reasonable
opportunity of show cause that the matter needs immediate attention. If on hearing the court is
unsatisfied with the ground that urgent or immediate relief need be granted in the suit, it should
return the plaint for the later presentation after satisfying the compliance needed in sub-section (1).
Section 80(3) of CPC, 1908 deals with the basic requirement of notice. If those requirements are
satisfied, then the suit cannot be set aside merely on the ground of any error or defect in the notice.
Those basic requirements of notice are:
a.)The name, description, and the residence of the plaintiff in such vivid way that it clearly allows to
identify the person serving the notice.
b.) Such notice had been delivered or left at the office of the appropriate authority specified in sub-
section (1)
c.)The cause of action and the relief claimed by the plaintiff had been substantially indicated.
Object of Notice and Legislative Intent Behind Serving
Notice
The underlying motive and object behind adding section 80 in CPC is:
a.) In case of reasonable and just reason for filling suit, a prior notice will provide an opportunity to
the government or public officer to correct or accept the demand put forward by the plaintiff. It
leads to speedy settlement of the grievances.
b.) In case of reasonable complaint government or public officer will get enough time of two
months to settle it down or to negotiate on the issue. Which might take years if it will decide in
court.
c.)By giving a chance to negotiate and settle down the dispute this section is inserted for saving the
money and time of plaintiff. It will help in avoiding money wastage in long process of litigation.
Contents or Requisites of notice u/s. 80 CPC
The essential contents or requisites of a notice u/s. 80 CPC are as under---
(1) whether the name, description and residence of the plaintiff are given so as to enable the
authorities to identify the person serving the notice;
(2) whether the cause of action and the relief which the plaintiff claims are set out with sufficient
particularity;
(3) whether a notice in writing has been delivered to or left at the office of the appropriate
authority mentioned in the section; and
●
(4) whether the suit is instituted after the expiration of two months next after notice has been
served, and the plaint contains a statement that such a notice has been so delivered or left. In
construing the notice the Court cannot ignore the object of the legislature, viz. to give to the
Government or the public servant concerned an opportunity to reconsider its or his legal
position. If on a reasonable reading of the notice the plaintiff is shown to have given the
information which the statute requires him to give, any incidental defects or irregularities
should be ignored.
Sec. 80 CPC is mandatory- Provisions u/s. 80 CPC are mandatory
and failure to serve two months prior notice will entail the dismissal of the
suit. (B.R. Sinha vs. State of M.P., AIR 1969 SC 1256 )
Urgency of the matter to be relevant consideration for grant of
leave u/s. 80 CPC- Court is competent to consider whether or not there is
in existence the urgency or likelihood of immediate relief being granted to
the plaintiff. If the court is of the opinion that there is no such urgency
existing or immediate relief cannot be granted, the court may refuse leave
u/s. 80(2) of the CPC.(Islamia Junior High School vs. State of U.P., AIR 1986 All 92
Errors or defects in notice u/s. 80 CPC- when not fatal?- Every
venial error or defect in notice u/s. 80 CPC is not fatal and such venial error
or defects cannot be permitted to defeat a just claim if on a reasonable
reading but not so as to make undue assumptions, the plaintiff is shown to
have given the information which the statute requires him to give, any
incidental defects or errors may be ignored. (The State of A.P. vs.
G.V. Suryanarayana, AIR 1965 SC 11)
Introduction of new cause of action through amendment and
notice u/s. 80 CPC- If by amendment of plaint, a new cause of action is
brought, then a fresh notice u/s. 80 CPC is mandatory. (Bishan Dayal vs. State of Orissa,
(2001) 1 SCC 555)
Death of plaintiff after issue of notice u/s. 80 CPC and before
institution of suit--- Where notice u/s. 80 CPC by plaintiff’s father was
issued to the Government but before the expiration of next two months and
institution of suit, the plaintiff’s father died and the suit was then filed by the
son without giving fresh notice u/s. 80 CPC, it has been held by the Supreme
Court that the notice u/s. 80 CPC already issued is sufficient and fresh notice
is not necessary.(Ghanshyam Dass vs. Dominion of India, AIR 1984
SC 1004)
Sec. 80 CPC to apply only in respect of acts of public officers done
in their official capacity- Where interim injunction u/o. 39, r. 1 CPC was
sought by the plaintiff in a suit for permanent injunction in respect of acts
done by the public officer in his official capacity but no notice u/s. 80 CPC
was given, it has been held that the suit was hit by Sec. 80 CPC and interim
injunction could not have been granted.(U.R. Agarwal vs. Brahm
Singh, AIR 1976 All 243)
Suit filed before expiration of two months next after notice u/s. 80
CPC not maintainable- A suit preferred before expiration of two months
next after notice u/s. 80 CPC is not maintainable.(Bihari Chowdhary
vs. State of Bihar, (1984) 2 SCC 627)
Order granting leave u/s. 80(2) CPC to be speaking- Order
granting leave u/s. 80(2) CPC must indicate the grounds pleaded and the
application of mind thereon. (State of A.P. vs. M/s. Pioneer Builders,
2006 (65) ALR 630 (SC)
CONCLUSION
Section 80 of CPC mandates an individual to send notice to the authority concerned for its
grievances and allow person to sue only after completion of 2 months after the notice. It is inserted
in CPC for providing speedy justice by saving valuable time and money of the plaintiff. The period
of 2 months is there for the purpose of providing an opportunity to the concerned authority for
addressing the issue and saving time of both, the accused government or public officer and the
plaintiff. There is not much scrutiny have done on the success rate of this section in CPC. But the
findings of Law Commission in reports point outs that this tool is not being utilised as an
opportunity to resolve dispute, instead it is misused as a technical defence for delaying the justice.
Legislature or Judiciary should attempt to preserve the intent of this legislation. Like the judiciary
can impose exemplary damages in the cases where the authority is at fault, and it could correct its
action within 2 months after receiving the notice. These steps can make this section more
meaningful and pragmatic which can be ultimately proved helpful in reducing the giant heap of
clogged cases in Indian Judicial system.
Thank You.
