( 1 ) THISREVISION petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 23-11 - 993, by which the learned trial Court has decided the issue of territorial jurisdiction as a preliminary issue and held that the Civil Court at Jodhpur has territorial jurisdiction over the matter.

( 2 ) THE facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the plaintiff/nonpetitioners filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 60,200/- against the defendant/petitioners alleging that on 2-6-1982, the defendantpetitioners had borrowed a sum of Rs. 25,000/ from the plaintiff/non-petitioner no. 1 at Ootacamund {tamil Nadu) to purchase a plot and in this connection, a promissory note was executed by the defendantpetitioners in favour of plaintiff/non-petitioner No. 1 at Ootacamund. Thereafter, for the same loan, an another promissory note was executd by the defendant-petitioners on 1-6-1983. Defendant-petitioners did not pay the amount of loan, therefore, they executed a third promissory note on 1-6-1988 for a sum of Rs. 40,000/- inclusive of the amount of interest at Ootacamund in favour of plaintiff/non-petitioner No. 1, who gave right to recover the interest on the said amount of promissory no