India DPDPA: Article 39 – Bar of Jurisdiction
39. Bar of Jurisdiction
No civil court shall have the jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceeding in respect of any matter for which the Board is empowered under the provisions of this Act and no injunction shall be granted by any court or other authority in respect of any action taken or to be taken in pursuance of any power under the provisions of this Act.
What Article 39 Means for Your Business
Article 39 prevents civil courts from entertaining suits or proceedings in relation to matters that the Data Protection Board is empowered to adjudicate. This channelling provision is designed to avoid parallel proceedings and ensure the specialist regulatory body handles data protection disputes.
- Data Principals cannot sue Data Fiduciaries in civil court for breach of the DPDPA, their remedy is through the Board’s complaint mechanism.
- If your organisation faces a civil claim related to data protection, assess whether the matter falls within the Board’s exclusive jurisdiction before engaging with court proceedings.
- This does not prevent separate civil claims for breach of contract, negligence, or other causes of action that may arise from the same factual circumstances as a DPDPA breach, seek legal advice on potential concurrent liability.
Frequently Asked Questions about Article 39
+ What does “bar of jurisdiction” mean in Article 39?
It means that civil courts do not have authority to hear cases that fall under the jurisdiction of the Data Protection Board.
+ Can businesses file cases in civil courts for DPDP matters?
No. Matters covered under the DPDP Act must be handled through the Board and the appellate mechanism provided in the Act.
+ Can courts stop actions taken by the Board?
No. Courts cannot grant injunctions against actions taken under the DPDP Act.
+ Why is this important for businesses?
It means businesses must follow the DPDP Act’s dispute resolution process rather than relying on traditional court remedies.