SRINIVASA IYENGAR, GOVINDA BHAT
BOMBAY GOODS CARRIERS (P) LTD – Appellant
Versus
SHAMULTHANMUL HASTIMAL AND SONS – Respondent
( 2 ) THE Revision Petition No. 1133/72 has been disposed of by us by a separate order dated 6-8-1973.
( 3 ) THE facts and circumstances in the instant case are somewhat different from those in that case. In the instant case, the respondent-plaintiff entrusted certain goods for carriage from Bangalore to Agra to the defendants. The contention raised by the defendants was that on the reverse of G. C. Note No. 5772 dt. 12-3-1970, there was a term that all claims and matters arising under the consignment should be settled in courts at Bombay, and therefore the suit filed in the Small Causes Court at Bangalore was not maintainable. The learned Small Causes Judge came to the conclusion that no part of the cause of action accrued at Bombay and therefore the Court at Bombay cannot have jurisdiction to try the suit and the parties merely agreeing that only Courts at Bombay would have jurisdiction to settle the claims would be of no effect.
( 4 ) THE pri
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.