Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Deccan Chronicle Holdings Ltd., was the original First Defendant in a suit filed by PIL Industries Ltd. (the plaintiff) for recovery of Rs.125 crores and declaration of a mortgage. The appellant had availed financial facilities from Future Capital Holdings Limited (the Seventh Defendant), and the plaintiff claimed under a Deed of Assignment dated 3 August 2012. The loan facility agreement was entered into on 11 July 2012. The plaintiff sought a declaration of a valid mortgage by deposit of title deeds and, alternatively, specific performance of an agreement to create a mortgage. The appellant took out Chamber Summons to revoke leave granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, arguing that no part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the Bombay High Court. The learned Single Judge dismissed the Chamber Summons, and the appellant appealed. The Division Bench held that the loan agreement was executed in Mumbai, title deeds were deposited in Mumbai, and the assignment deed was also executed in Mumbai, thus part of the cause of action arose within jurisdiction. The court also noted that the appellant had not disputed these facts in the written statement. The appeals were dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Territorial Jurisdiction - Clause 12 Letters Patent - Cause of Action - The appellant sought revocation of leave granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent on the ground that no part of the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of the Bombay High Court. The court held that the loan agreement was executed in Mumbai, title deeds were deposited in Mumbai, and the assignment deed was also executed in Mumbai, thus part of the cause of action arose within jurisdiction. The appeal was dismissed. (Paras 1-18)
B) Mortgage - Mortgage by Deposit of Title Deeds - Creation of Mortgage - The plaintiff sought a declaration of a valid mortgage by deposit of title deeds and alternatively specific performance of an agreement to create a mortgage. The court noted that the deposit of title deeds in Mumbai was a significant factor in determining jurisdiction. (Paras 2-3)
C) Assignment - Assignment of Debt - Jurisdiction - The plaintiff claimed under a Deed of Assignment dated 3 August 2012 by which the loan facilities were assigned. The assignment deed was executed in Mumbai, contributing to the cause of action within jurisdiction. (Para 2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the learned Single Judge was justified in refusing to revoke leave granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent on the ground that no part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the Bombay High Court.
Final Decision
Both appeals are dismissed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Clause 12 Letters Patent
- cause of action
- territorial jurisdiction
- mortgage by deposit of title deeds
- assignment of debt
- leave to sue
Case Details
2013 LawText (BOM) (10) 55
APPEAL (L) NO. 128 OF 2013 and APPEAL (L) NO. 125 OF 2013
Dr. D. Y. Chandrachud, M. S. Sonak
Mr. Praveer Diwan, Mr. Harish Pandya i/b. Mr. Chakrapani Misra, Ms. Meghna Rajadhyaksha, Mr. Rohit Sayaraman i/b. Khaitan & Co. for Appellant; Mr. V. R. Dhond – Senior Advocate with Mr. Abhishek Kale and Ms. Shubhra Swami i/b. Naik Naik & Co. for Respondent No. 1; Mr. S. S. Deshpande – Court Receiver with Mr. N. A. Bandodkar - 2nd Assistant to Court Receiver present.
Deccan Chronicle Holdings Ltd.
PIL Industries Ltd. & Ors. (in Appeal 128/2013) and Future Corporate Resources Ltd. & Ors. (in Appeal 125/2013)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeal against refusal to revoke leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent in a suit for recovery and declaration of mortgage.
Remedy Sought
Revocation of leave granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent.
Filing Reason
Appellant contended that no part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the Bombay High Court.
Previous Decisions
Learned Single Judge dismissed the Chamber Summons seeking revocation of leave.
Issues
Whether part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the Bombay High Court to sustain the grant of leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that the loan agreement was executed in Hyderabad, title deeds were deposited in Hyderabad, and the assignment deed was executed in Hyderabad, so no part of cause of action arose in Mumbai.
Respondent argued that the loan agreement was executed in Mumbai, title deeds were deposited in Mumbai, and the assignment deed was executed in Mumbai, thus part of cause of action arose within jurisdiction.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the loan agreement was executed in Mumbai, title deeds were deposited in Mumbai, and the assignment deed was executed in Mumbai, thus part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the Bombay High Court, justifying the grant of leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent.
Judgment Excerpts
Both the Appeals arise from a judgment and order of a learned Single Judge dated 4 February 2013 on Chamber Summons which were taken out by the Appellant for revoking the leave which was granted by the learned Single Judge under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent.
The Appellant in both the Appeals is the original First Defendant.
The claim in the suit is for the recovery of an amount of Rs.125 crores which is claimed to be due and payable to the Plaintiff or, alternatively, to the Seventh Defendant.
The Plaintiff seeks in prayer (c) of the plaint a declaration of the existence of a valid and subsisting mortgage of immovable properties.
The learned Single Judge was justified in refusing to revoke the leave.
Procedural History
The appellant filed Chamber Summons (L) No. 139 of 2013 and Chamber Summons (L) No. 140 of 2013 seeking revocation of leave granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. The learned Single Judge dismissed the Chamber Summons on 4 February 2013. The appellant filed the present appeals against that order.
Acts & Sections
- Letters Patent (Bombay): Clause 12
