Section 9-A jurisdictional objections require evidence where disputed facts or mixed questions of law and fact arise.

Section 9-A requires the court to decide a jurisdictional objection as a preliminary issue before granting or vacating interim relief, departing from the ordinary procedure under Order XIV Rule 2 CPC. Where jurisdiction turns on a pure question of law, the court may decide it on the pleadings alone. Where it involves disputed facts or a mixed question of law and fact, the issue cannot be finally determined without allowing oral and documentary evidence. A prima facie view based only on the plaint is insufficient for final adjudication in such cases, and parties are entitled to lead evidence.

---

---

Issues: Whether, while deciding the preliminary issue of jurisdiction under section 9-A, the parties are required to be given an opportunity to lead evidence.

Analysis: Section 9-A creates a mandatory departure from the ordinary procedure under Order XIV, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure by requiring the Court to decide a jurisdictional objection as a preliminary issue before granting or vacating interim relief. Where the jurisdictional question is a pure question of law, it may be decided on the pleadings alone. Where, however, the question is a mixed question of law and fact, it cannot be finally determined without allowing the parties to adduce oral and documentary evidence. A prima facie view based only on the plaint is insufficient for final adjudication of such a jurisdictional issue under section 9-A.

Conclusion: Parties are entitled to lead evidence when the preliminary jurisdictional issue under section 9-A involves disputed facts or a mixed question of law and fact.

---