ORDER :

1. This revision is filed against the order dated 22.01.2021, wherein and whereby, the court of XV Additional District and Sessions Judge - cum - XV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge - cum - II Additional Family Judge, R.R. District, Kukatpally, dismissed I.A.No.1157/2020 in O.S.No.91 of 2020, filed by the defendants under Order 7, Rule 10(3) read with Section 151 of C.P.C. to return the plaint for want of territorial jurisdiction.

2. Sri Challa Dhanamjaya, learned counsel for the petitioners/defendants would submit that as per the plaint averments, the memorandum of understanding, based on which the plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of amount, was executed at Vizianagaram, and that no part of cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the court at Kukatpally, Hyderabad. He submits that the averments made in the plaint and the documents filed along with the plaint alone have to be considered to decide the jurisdiction of the court. But the trial court has relied on the letter dated 3.4.2018, stated to have been written by the petitioners to the respondent along with partnership deed dated 15.04.2013. He submits that these documents do not form part