Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
GURMEET SINGH SANDHAWALIA, CJ, SATYEN VAIDYA
Archana Koul Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Dhani Loan and Services (Formerly Indiabulls Consumer Ltd.) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. preliminary issue of jurisdiction determined. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. appellant relies on prior apex court rulings. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. territorial jurisdiction depends on cause of action. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. details of appointment and termination relevant. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 5. jurisdiction clauses and agreements analyzed. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 6. court upheld jurisdiction agreement. (Para 16 , 17) |
| 7. appeal dismissed; no grounds for interference. (Para 18 , 19) |
JUDGMENT :
G.S. Sandhawalia, CJ.
1. The present Letters Patent Appeal is directed against order dated 01.07.2024, passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Suit No. 131 of 2022, wherein Issue No. 10 was treated as a Preliminary Issue, which was pertaining to the issue of territorial jurisdiction that whether this Court has jurisdiction to hear and entertain the suit in question.
2. Vide the aforesaid order, the learned Single Judge held that only the Courts at Delhi would have exclusive jurisdiction, as the parties had agreed by way of contract enteredby them and the plaint was ordered to be returned to the plaintiff for its presentation before the appropriate Court having territorial jurisdiction.
3. Learned Counsel
Parties may restrict jurisdiction to a designated court by agreement, provided that court holds jurisdiction over the matter.
A High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226(2) requires that part of the cause of action arises within its territorial limits.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Labour Court in the area where the workman was employed and where the cause of action arose would have territorial jurisdiction, as suppor....
The court established that parties can agree to confer exclusive jurisdiction to a specific court, and such agreements are enforceable, particularly when the cause of action is connected to that juri....
The court established that the territorial jurisdiction of the court was not completely excluded by the jurisdiction clause of the employment agreement, and the court had the jurisdiction to entertai....
High Court jurisdiction under Article 226(2) arises if even fraction of cause of action, like receipt of impugned order at residence within territory, occurs therein. No laches where authorities dela....
The interpretation of the expression 'carries on business' in the context of the plaintiff under the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and the Copyright Act, 1957, and the restrictions on the plaintiff's right t....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
