Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s. Rajesh Coach Builders (original defendant no.1), a partnership firm based in Jaipur, challenged the judgment and order dated 15.3.1994 passed by the 5th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kolhapur, which held that the court at Kolhapur has jurisdiction to try and decide the suit filed by respondent no.1, M/s. Shah Nagindas Machchram & Sons (original plaintiff). The plaintiff had filed a suit for recovery of Rs.22,22,931/- with interest at 21% per annum for supply of cut size steel sheets and mild steel sheets (goods) to the defendant. The defendant, engaged in body building of vehicles, placed an order for the goods with the plaintiff. The defendant's establishment is at Jaipur, while the plaintiff's establishment is at Kolhapur. In the written statement, the defendant raised an objection regarding territorial jurisdiction, contending that the cause of action arose at Jaipur. The trial court framed a preliminary issue on jurisdiction and recorded evidence from both sides. The plaintiff examined Mr. D.N. Shah, and the defendant examined Mr. V.M. Shah. The trial court held that part of the cause of action arose at Kolhapur because the defendant's representative visited Kolhapur and placed the order, and the plaintiff accepted the order at Kolhapur. Additionally, payment was to be made by cheque at Kolhapur. The High Court, in the writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, examined the evidence and found that the trial court's finding was based on evidence and was not perverse. The court noted that the defendant's witness admitted that the order was placed at Kolhapur and that the plaintiff's witness stated that the order was accepted at Kolhapur. The court also observed that the defendant had a branch office at Kolhapur, which further supported the jurisdiction. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the trial court's order on jurisdiction.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Territorial Jurisdiction - Cause of Action - Section 20(c) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - The court held that part of cause of action arose at Kolhapur as the order for supply of goods was placed by the defendant at Kolhapur and payment was to be made by cheque at Kolhapur, thus conferring jurisdiction on Kolhapur court. The trial court's finding that the defendant's representative visited Kolhapur and placed the order, and that the plaintiff accepted the order at Kolhapur, was based on evidence and not perverse. (Paras 2-5) B) Civil Procedure - Preliminary Issue - Jurisdiction - Section 9 CPC - The court noted that the trial court had framed a preliminary issue on jurisdiction and decided it after recording evidence. The High Court, in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 227, declined to interfere with the finding of fact unless it was perverse or without jurisdiction. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Civil Court at Kolhapur has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit for recovery of money based on a contract for supply of goods, where the defendant is based in Jaipur and the plaintiff in Kolhapur.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the trial court's order that the court at Kolhapur has jurisdiction to try the suit.
Law Points
- Territorial jurisdiction
- Cause of action
- Section 20 CPC
- Part of cause of action
- Place of business
- Acceptance of order
- Payment by cheque
