Jurisdiction under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is determined based on the location of the cause of action, as per S.20(a), S.20(c), and Explanation II to S.20.

1. The plaintiff, the Nedungadi Bank Ltd., Kozhikode, issued two cheques, Nos. 355875 and 355896, on the Central Bank of India Ltd., Barabazar Branch, Calcutta. According to the counterfoil of cheque No. 355875 (Ext. A-3) the date of that cheque should be 24-10-1949, the payee, the Anglo Swiss Watch Company, and the amount covered Rs. 82-8-0. According to the counterfoil of cheque No 355896 (Ext. A-4) the date of that cheque should be 10-11-1949, the payee, New Standard Watch Company, and the amount covered, Rs. 165-0-0.

2. Cheque No. 355875 when presented at the office of the Central Bank of India Ltd., Barabazar Branch, Calcutta on 3-11-1949 bore the date 29-10-1949. The payee mentioned in the cheque was Amulya Ratan Saha Ray, and the amount, Rs.1,765-0-0. Cheque No. 455896 when presented at the office of the Central Bank of India Ltd., Barabazar Branch, Calcutta, on 17-11-1949 bore the date 14-11-1949. The payee mentioned in the cheque was Radheshyam Agarwalla, and the amount,

Rs. 3,897-0-0. The cheques were duly honoured and the Central Bank of India Ltd., Barabazar Branch, Calcutta, debited the amounts in the current account of the plaintiff with that branch. The plaint questions the validity of the two debits and seeks recovery of the total of those debits, namely, Rs. 5,662-0-0, on the ground that the Central Bank of India Limited was negligent in the discharge of its duty as a banker of the plaintiff in not discovering the alterations in the cheques and refusing payment on that account.

3. The only question that arises for determination in this C.M.A. is whether the suit can be instituted as has been done by the plaintiff in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of South Malabar, Kozhikode. Issue No.1- "Whether this court has jurisdiction to try this suit?" - relates to this question. The lower court considered the arguments advanced before it and said:

"Both under the general law of banker and customer and on the narrower aspect of the claim made for repayment of two sums of money wrongly debited in the current account of the plaintiff at Calcutta the cause of action cannot be said to have arisen in Kozhikode. I hold that this court has no jurisdiction to try this suit".

4. It is common ground that the head office of the Central Bank of India Limited is in Bombay, and that it has a branch at Kozhikode. Under S.20 (a) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, it is possible to institute a suit where the defendant "carries on business", and under S.20 (c) where the "cause of action, wholly or in part, arises". Explanation II to S.20 provides:

"A corporation shall be deemed to carry on business at its sole or principal office in India or, in respect of any cause of action arising at any place where it has also a subordinate office, at such place".

5. As pointed out by Chitaley:

"The result of this explanation is to restrict the meaning of the expression "carries on business" in Cl. [a] in relation to corporations. But in the presence of Cl. [c] the purpose of the second part of the explanation is obscure. However that may be where the suit is instituted at a place where a corporation maintains a subordinate office, the Court cannot dispense with the requirement that the cause of action must arise at such a place". [Civil Procedure Code, Vol. I, page 558; see also the cases cited in the commentary in support of the proposition]

In other words, if no part of the cause of action arises at the place where the branch office is situate, the mere fact of the corporation having a branch office will not give the court of that place jurisdiction to

entertain a suit.

6. Para.15 of the plaint reads as follows:

"The cause of action for this suit arose on 3-11-1949 and 17-11-1949 when the defendant paid the amounts respectively under the two cheques and debited the said amounts against the plaintiff in its current account and thereafter in Nagaram amsom in Calicut in South Malabar where the originals of the forged cheques were drawn within t