The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of 'cause of action' and its significance in determining the jurisdiction of the court.

Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.

1. The, question raised in this appeal is whether a cause of action arose in part within the original civil jurisdiction of this Court. The appellants are a firm of hide merchants carrying on business in Hyderabad, Sind. On the 21st April, 1937, the appellants telegraphed to the respondent, who is a merchant carrying on business at Madras and at Madhavaram, offering to sell him 5,000 sheep hides of a certain quality at the price of Rs. 128 per 100 skins, delivery to be given at the railway station in Hyderabad. The respondent by a telegram of the same date made a counter-offer. He informed the appellants that he was prepared to accept the hides at the price of Rs. 125 per 100 skins. This counter-offer was accepted by the appellants by telegram the next day. On the 4th May, 1937, the appellants made an offer to the respondent in respect of another parcel of hides but of a different quality at the price of Rs. 80 per 100 skins. Here again, the respondent made a counter-offer. On 5th May he telegraphed saying that he was prepared to buy at the price of Rs. 75 per 100 skins. This counter-offer was accepted by the appellants by a telegram despatched from Hyderabad on the 7th May. The prices given were for Hyderabad railway station and therefore the respondent under the terms of the contract was bound to take delivery at Hyderabad. This was not convenient and at the respondents request the goods were forwarded to Madras via Karachi through a firm of forwarding argents. The arrangements in this connection must be taken to be the arrangements of the respondent. Both consignments duly arrived in Madras and were taken by the respondent to his tannery at Madhavaram, where they were unpacked and inspected. The respondent considered that the goods were of inferior quality and he decided to reject them, which he did by a letter posted from Madras. The appellants denied that the goods were of inferior quality and refused to take them back. The result was that a suit was filed on the Original Side of this Court by the respondent for damages for breach of contract.

2. In the plaint the respondent averred that part of the cause of action arose in Madras:

where the offers were made, wherefrom the sum of Rs. 7,500 was remitted to the defendants and the breach of the condition of the goods was ascertained and the goods were rejected.

3. Under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent the Court has jurisdiction to try a suit in which the cause of action partly arises within the local limits of the ordinary civil jurisdiction of the Court, provided leave is first obtained. The respondent applied for and obtained leave to file the suit. The appellants, having been served with the summons, asked for the revocation of the order granting leave. The application was heard by Gentle, J., who rejected it. The appeal now before us is from that order. The learned Judge held that the case fell within the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Engineering Supplies, Ltd. v. Dhandhania & Co. I.L.R. (1930) 58 Cal 539, which he considered was not in conflict with the decisions of this Court in The National Insurance Co., Ltd., Calcutta v. Seethammal AIR1933Mad764 and Kamisetti Subbiah v. Katha Venkataswamy I.L.R.(1903) 27 Mad. 355. As I do not share the opinion that the decisions of the two Courts are in harmony it will be necessary to examine these cases, but before doing so, I consider it desirable to refer to two English decisions which have bearing on the appeal.

4. The first of these cases is Read v. Brown (1889) 58 Q.B. p. 120, in which the Court of appeal (Lord Esher and Fry and Lopes, L. JJ;) defined "cause of action" as comprising every fact, which if traversed, it is necessary for a plaintiff to prove to entitle him to succeed. This definition has found general acceptance. The second case is Clarke Brothers v. Knowles (1918) 1 K.B. 128, in which it was held that where a contract is made by an offer and acceptance sent through the