1. The plaintiff, a merchant of the Palghat District, sued in a Palghat court for the recovery of Rs. 1930.95 which he alleged was due for the price of two consignments of tamarind sold by him on 16-1-1954 and 23-1-1954 to the defendant, a merchant of the Tanjore District. The trial court, finding that it had no territorial jurisdiction, ordered the return of the plaint for presentation to the proper court, and his appeal, from that order having failed, the plaintiff has come up in revision.

2. To give jurisdiction to the Palghat Court, the plaint alleged that the contract of sale took place within the jurisdiction of that court and that the moneys due by the defendant were payable there. If that were so, doubtless the Palghat court would have jurisdiction. But the concurrent findings of the courts below are otherwise. Both courts rejected the plaintiff's case that the order for the tamarind had been placed with him at his place of business in the Palghat District, in fact, that the agreement to sell took place there. They found that the practice of the plaintiff was to despatch goods to places where he expected to find buyers and then to proceed to the place and effect