SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(SC) 1319

S.B.SINHA, HARJIT SINGH BEDI
Mohanakumaran Nair – Appellant
Versus
Vijayakumaran Nair – Respondent


judgment

S.B. Sinha, J. —

1.Leave granted.

2.Appellant is said to have borrowed a sum of Rs. 6,02,000/- (Rupees Six Lacs Two Thousand Only) from the respondent. The said transaction was carried out at Saudi Arabia. Appellant executed a promissory note on 8.5.1999. Admittedly, the parties were residing at Saudi Arabia at the relevant time. No part of the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Attingal. Respondent herein filed a suit for recovery of the aforementioned amount in the Subordinate Court at Attingal. Although both the parties were residing in Saudi Arabia, Plaintiff filed a suit in the Court of Subordinate Judge, Attingal for recovery of the said amount sometime in the year 2002. Appellant having been summoned, appeared in the suit. He, inter alia, raised an issue of lack of territorial jurisdiction on the part of the said court to entertain the suit. By an Order dated 15.3.2005, the application of the appellant was dismissed by the Ld. Trial Judge holding:

“Admittedly the transaction took place at Riyadh in Soudi Arabia which is beyond the jurisdiction of this court. According to the defendant since the transaction took place beyon





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top