Case Note & Summary
The suit was filed by Dr. Ashok M. Bhat and another against Harichand Nagpal and another for specific performance of an agreement to sell. The preliminary issue of territorial jurisdiction of the Bombay High Court was framed and required evidence to be led. The Plaintiffs filed their affidavit of examination-in-chief under Order XVIII Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). The admissibility of the Plaintiffs' documents was considered under that Rule. A Commissioner was appointed for recording cross-examination under specific directions issued in terms of the proviso to Order XVIII Rule 4(2) CPC. The Commissioner recorded the evidence of the Plaintiffs under Order XVIII Rule 4(3) and (4) CPC. The remuneration of the Commissioner was not fixed under Order XVIII Rule 4 CPC. The court did not decide the jurisdiction issue at this stage but allowed the evidence to be recorded.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Territorial Jurisdiction - Preliminary Issue - Order XVIII Rule 4 CPC - The court considered the admissibility of documents and appointment of Commissioner for cross-examination under Order XVIII Rule 4 CPC. The preliminary issue of territorial jurisdiction required evidence to be led, and the Plaintiffs' affidavit of examination-in-chief was taken on record. The Commissioner was appointed to record cross-examination under specific directions. (Paras 1-2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the preliminary issue of territorial jurisdiction of this Court can be decided without evidence being led, and whether the Plaintiffs' documents are admissible under Order XVIII Rule 4 CPC.
Final Decision
The court allowed the Plaintiffs' affidavit of examination-in-chief to be taken on record and appointed a Commissioner to record cross-examination under Order XVIII Rule 4 CPC. The preliminary issue of territorial jurisdiction was not decided at this stage.
Law Points
- Territorial jurisdiction
- Preliminary issue
- Order XVIII Rule 4 CPC
- Evidence required for jurisdiction
- Specific performance
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (08) 95
Mr. Amit Jamsandekar i/by Mr. Vinod Bhagat for Plaintiffs, Mr. R.V. Bhasin with Ms. Jaya Meghani i/by Gajaria & Co. for Defendant No.1
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell
Remedy Sought
Plaintiffs seek specific performance of an agreement to sell against the Defendants
Filing Reason
Dispute over an agreement to sell, requiring determination of territorial jurisdiction
Previous Decisions
Preliminary issue of territorial jurisdiction was framed and required evidence to be led
Issues
Whether the preliminary issue of territorial jurisdiction can be decided without evidence?
Whether the Plaintiffs' documents are admissible under Order XVIII Rule 4 CPC?
Submissions/Arguments
Plaintiffs filed affidavit of examination-in-chief and documents under Order XVIII Rule 4 CPC.
Commissioner appointed for cross-examination under proviso to Order XVIII Rule 4(2) CPC.
Ratio Decidendi
The preliminary issue of territorial jurisdiction requires evidence to be led and cannot be decided without trial. The court may appoint a Commissioner for recording cross-examination under Order XVIII Rule 4 CPC.
Judgment Excerpts
The preliminary issue of territorial jurisdiction of this Court, which was framed and was to be answered, required evidence to be led.
The Plaintiffs filed their Affidavit of examination-in-chief, which was taken on record of this Court under the provisions of Order XVIII Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).
Procedural History
Suit No.224 of 2008 was filed. A preliminary issue of territorial jurisdiction was framed. The Plaintiffs filed an affidavit of examination-in-chief under Order XVIII Rule 4 CPC. The court considered admissibility of documents and appointed a Commissioner for cross-examination under Order XVIII Rule 4(2) proviso. The Commissioner recorded evidence under Order XVIII Rule 4(3) and (4). Remuneration was not fixed.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Order XVIII Rule 4, Order XVIII Rule 4(2), Order XVIII Rule 4(3), Order XVIII Rule 4(4)
