A specific provision in a contract regarding the choice of forum should be enforced unless there is a good ground for not doing so.

( 1 ) THIS appeal arises out an order passed by Ajay K. Basu, J. on the 22nd November, 1976 dismissing the application of the appellants who happened to be defendants Nos. 1 and 2 in the suit for stay of the suit filed by the plaintiff in this Court, for an injunction restraining the plaintiff from proceeding with the suit, for revoking leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent and for other reliefs.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff instituted this suit in this Court on the 26th April, 1976. In the suit, the prayer of the plaintiff is for a decree for Rs. 7,58,322. 48 p and in the alternative (i) a decree against the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 or alternatively against the defendant No. 3 for Rupees 1,77,106. 44p. with interest thereon @ 12% per annum or at such other rate as may be prescribed from June 28, 1973 till the institution of the suit, (ii) an enquiry into the damages as pleaded in para. 11 of the plaint and decree for such sum as may be found due to the plaintiff, interest and other reliefs.

( 3 ) THE plaintiff also prayed for leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent and under Order II, Rule 2 of the Civil P. C. The plaintiff entered into a contract with the defendant No. 2 who is the sole proprietor of the defendant No. 1. The said contract was in writing and under the said contract the plaintiff agreed to buy and the defendants were to sell 10,000 Kgs. of Chloramphenicol Powder I. P. to be supplied during the months of April, May, June, July and August, 1973 @ 2,000 Kgs. each month at the agreed price of Rs. 340/- per Kg. F. O. B. Bombay. Under the terms of the said agreement between the parties the plaintiff was to open in favour of the defendant No. 1 a confirmed irrevocable revolving Letter of Credit for Rs. 34,00,000/- equivalent to the value of 10,000 Kgs. of the said merchandise. The said contract contains a clause to the following effect: "this contract is subject to Bombay jurisdiction. "

( 4 ) IN this suit the plaintiff's cause of action against the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 is that the defendants instead of supplying Chloramphenicol Powder have supplied Talcum Powder in breach of the said contract between the parties and on the basis of such cause of action the plaintiff has asked for refund of the money paid in respect of the said supply and also for damages. The plaintiff in this suit has impleaded Dena Bank as a party defendant being defendant No 3. The cause of action of the plaintiff against Dena Bank is that in the event it be held that the defendants Nos, 1 and 2 had supplied proper materials then the said materials which went into the custody of Dena Bank must have been changed in the custody of the Dena Bank.

( 5 ) THE defendants Nos, 1 and 2 thereafter made this application for stay of this suit and also for revocation of leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. The said application of the defendant No. 2 was opposed by the plaintiff and also by the defendant No. 3. The learned trial Judge was pleased to dismiss the said application' of the defendants Nos. 1 and 2 by his order under appeal. It appears that the learned trial Judge did not deliver any judgment.

( 6 ) THE principal contention of the appellants before us has been that in view of the specific provision in the contract between the plaintiff and the defendant No. 2 that the contract is subject to Bombay jurisdiction, this Court should not entertain this suit. Reliance has been placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Hakam Singh v. M/9. Gammon (I) Ltd. , and also decision of the Division Benoh of this Court in the case of Sri Rajendra Mills Ltd. v. H. V. M. Haji Hasan Dada Reliance has also been made in this connection on two other decisions, one of which is and the other is a decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, reported in AIR 1962 Andh Pra 452,

( 7 ) MR. Mitter, appearing on behalf of the appellants, has contended that in view of the specific covenant in the contract and in the light of the decision