Defendant carries on business at Chennai and purchased goods from Plaintiff at Chennal-Suit filed before City Civil Court, Chennai- City civil court Chennai has jurisdiction.

Citation

2016 (3) CTC 411 (Mad)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS

M.V. Muralidaran, 1.

CAP.(PD) No.4495 of 2013 & M.P. No.1 of 2013,

April 22, 2016

Irbaz Shoes, Rep. by Its Proprietor, No.2 (487), Kilpauk Garden Road, Kilpauk, Chennai-10

Vs...

Bostik India Private Limited, Rep. by Its Technical Service Executive, Mr. J. Balaji, No.W-393/9, 4th Floor, A.R. Building, School Road, Anna Nagar West Extension, Chennai-101

Facts The Philatiff Nai filed v Sim Contrecovery money before

Cost Call at Chen The Defendant filed Interim Avslication under Order Rule 1010 retum the Plain on the ground that forms and conditions of

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), Order 7, Rule 10 & Section 20- Return of Plaint - Territorial Jurisdiction of Courts - Suit for recovery of Money - Defendant carries on business at Chennai and purchased goods from Plaintiff at Chennal-Suit filed before City Civil Court, Chennai-Maintainability Contention of Defendant that express terms and conditions of sale stipulate that Courts situated at City of Bangalore shall have exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate lis-Plaint can be returned where Court has no jurisdiction at all to entertain Suit - Defendant purchased goods from Plaintiff at Chennal and Plaintiff's Office is situated within Territorial jurisdiction of City Civil Court, Chennal- Part of cause of action had arisen within Territorial jurisdiction of Courts at Chennai-Plaint cannot be returned for lack of Territorial jurisdiction