JUDGMENT :

R. SUBRAMANIAN, J.

Prayer: This Application has been filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of the Original Side Rules, Clause XII of the Letters Patent Act read with Order III Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules seeking to revoke the leave obtained by the plaintiffs on 09.04.2013 in Application No. 1702 of 2013.

1. This application is taken out by the defendants in the suit in C.S. No. 247 of 2013 seeking revocation of leave to file the suit in this Court granted under Clause XII of the Letters Patent on 01.04.2013.

2. The suit in question has been filed by the respondents as an under-chapter suit under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking a money decree for a sum of Rs. 5,70,00,000/- with interest at 18% per annum on Rs. 4,50,00,000/- from the date of suit till date of payment.

3. According to the plaintiffs, the defendants have received monies from the plaintiffs under the pretext of buying properties at Pondicherry for the business of the plaintiffs. During September 2011, the defendants have proposed that the plaintiffs could purchase land measuring about 8½ acres situate at Villiyanur in Pondicherry belonging to the 3rd defendant. Believing the representations made by the defendants, the plaintiffs have parted with a sum of Rs. 3 Crores by raising money from their relatives, friends and others for the purchase of the lands.

4. To their surprise, the plaintiffs learnt that the 1st defendant had in fact arranged for taking the sale deed in the name of the defendants 1 and 2, when this act was questioned, the 1st defendant represented that the 3rd defendant was not prepared to sell the land to others and hence the sale deed has to be taken in the name of the defendants 1 and 2. After several rounds of discussion between the parties at the house of the 1st plaintiff at T. Nagar, Chennai, it was agreed that the sale deeds are to be taken in the name of defendants 1 and 2 and they shall in turn execute irrevocable power of attorney in the name of the plaintiffs 2 and 3. They would also deposit the title deeds relating to the property with the plaintiffs. On the same day, the defendants would also execute the agreement acknowledging the borrowing and promising to re-pay the same.

5. Consequent upon such an agreement, the sale deeds were executed and registered on 17.10.2011 as Doc. Nos. 5826/2011 and 5827/2011 in the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Villiyanur, Pondicherry. On the same day, the defendants had executed irrevocable power of attorney in favour of the plaintiffs 2 and 3 and the same was registered in the Office of the Sub-Registrar at Villiyanur as Doc. No. 522/2011. They also executed an agreement acknowledging the debt and agreeing to re-pay the same at Chennai in the house of the 1st plaintiff. The said document has also been produced as suit document.

6. Since the defendants did not honour the commitment made by them and did not re-pay the money as promised, the plaintiffs have come up with the above suit. Along with the suit, the plaintiffs have filed an application in A. No. 1702 of 2013 seeking leave to institute the suit in this Court under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent, contending that, inasmuch as the defendants executed the agreement dated 17.10.2011 at Chennai and deposited the title deeds relating to the properties in the house of the 1st plaintiff at Chennai, a part of the cause of action had arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court.

7. The suit was filed as a summary suit and an ex-parte order came to be passed in the suit on 22.09.2014. An application was filed before the learned Master seeking to set aside the ex-parte order. The learned Master allowed the application on condition the applicants viz. the defendants deposited a sum of Rs. 3 Crores to the credit of the suit on or before 06.04.2015. The said order came to be passed by the learned Master on 23.02.2015.

8. Aggrieved by the said conditional order, the defendants 1 and 2 challenged the same in A. Nos. 2182 and 2183 of 2015. By order