Assignment of a negotiable instrument gives rise to a cause of action at the place of endorsement or assignment.

GOPAL RAO EKBOTE, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a revision petition directed against the judgment and decree of the subordinate Judge, Vijayawada, given on 13-2-1963. The material facts in order to appreciate the contention raised before me may briefly be stated

( 2 ) THE defendant borrowed a sum of Rs. 500 from one Pelluri Veera Raghavayya for agricultural purposes and executed a promissory note on 19-12-1959 at Guntur. The said payee transferred the suit promissory note to one Chittarvu Venkata Sharma for collection on 29-12-1959, As the said transferee could not succeed in collecting the debt, he re-transferred the promissory note in favour of the original payee: on 17-1-1961.

( 3 ) THE original payee again transferred the suit promissory note for collection in favour of one Ramaraju Seetharamaiah, who in turn transferred the same in favour of the plaintiff at Vijayawada on 29-10-1961.

( 4 ) THE plaintiff on the foot of this transfer instituted the present suit against the defendant in the subordinate Judges Court at Vijayawada on the Small Cause side for the recovery of the sum due on the promissory note.

( 5 ) THE defendant remained ex parte. The plaintiff produced some evidence. The learned subordinate Judge without considering the merits of the case dismissed the suit on the ground that the sub-court at Vijayawada has no Jurisdiction to entertain the suit. It held that the common law rule that the debtor must seek the creditor goes not apply to a case of negotiable document. Consequently the plaintiff cannot institute the suit at a place where neither the defendant resides nor carries on his business, merely on the ground that the plaintiff resides at the place where the suit was instituted. It further held that Section-20 CPC has no application since it cannot be presumed that any part of the cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of the Vijayawada Court merely because the suit promissory note was finally transferred in favour of the plaintiff and that the transfer took place at Vijayawada. Since the debtor as well as the original payee belong to Guntur district and the suit promissory note was also executed at Guntur, it is the Guntur Court which has the jurisdiction and not the court at Vijayawada. It is this view which is now challenged in this revision petition.

( 6 ) THE contention of Srimati j. Sitamahalakshmi, the learned counsel for the petitioner, is that the endorsement of a negotiable instrument or the assignment of a promissory note gives rise to a cause of action at the place of endorsement or assignment and as the assignment took place at Vijayawada, the sub-court at Vijayawada has the necessary jurisdiction to My this case.

( 7 ) ACCORDING to Section 20 (c) CPC, cannot be in doubt that a suit can be instituted in a Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the cause of action has arisen either wholly or in part. It is no doubt true that the promissory note was executed at Guntur and that the original parties to the promissory note were also the residents of Guntur. It cannot however he forgotten that the transfer of the suit promissory note has taken place at Vijayawada. Not only the endorsement was made at Vijayawada but the assignment also took place there. The question therefore which arises is whether such A transfer provides a cause of action in part at Vijayawada. I have no doubt that the endorsement of the suit promissory note and the assignment of it does give rise to a part of the cause of action at Vijayawada where admittedly the endorsement and the assignment have taken place. The endorsement and the assignment would therefore provide in part a cause of action. The expression "cause of action" has been compendiously defined to mean every tact which it would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove if traversed in order to support his right to the judgment of the court. It may not comprise every piece of evidence which may be necessary to prove the facts involved in a case, b

Click Here to Read the rest of this document