1. Issue No.1 raised in O.S. 497/1984 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Kozhikode reads: "Whether this Court has got territorial jurisdiction to try the suit?"

The Court answered the issue in favour of the plaintiffs. This finding is challenged in revision.

2. Second plaintiff (second respondent) consigned goods from Calicut to Sohranpur for carriage by the defendants (revision petitioners), who constitute a transport undertaking. Consignment was not delivered at the destination. Goods had been insured with the first plaintiff (first respondent) Insurer paid value of the goods to the second plaintiff and both of them filed the suit for recovery of damages from the transport undertaking. Head Office of the transport undertaking is at Calcutta. Contract was entered into and the branch office of the transport undertaking is also situate at Calicut, within the jurisdiction of the Munsiff's Court. Calicut. Consignment was to be delivered at a place within the jurisdiction of the Calcutta Court. There is no dispute that parts of the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of the two courts and both courts have jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit for damages. Furt