SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(Online)(KER) 17342

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J
E V PAULOSE – Appellant
Versus
C ALEXANDER AGED 71 YEARS    Advocate -SRI DESI MATTHAI – Respondent


J U D G M E N T

This appeal arises from the judgment dated 19.03.2011 in A.S. No.107 of 2003 of the Sub Court, Muvattupuzha.

2. The 1st respondent filed O.S. No.188 of 1998 for recovery of money based on a chitty transaction, originally in the Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam on 03.04.1995. The appellant-1st defendant and others contended that the said court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit. According to them, jurisdiction lay with the court at Jamshedpur since all the transactions took place there. Learned Munsiff, Ernakulam vide order dated 12.04.1996 held that the said court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit and directed that the plaint be returned. The 1st respondent was directed to take steps as per Rule 10A of Order VII of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, “the Code”).

3. The 1st respondent filed I.A. No.1029 of 1998 under Rule 10A of Order VII of the Code on 27.02.1998 requesting that the plaint be returned. Learned Munsiff, Ernakulam ordered return of the plaint. As the learned counsel for the 1st respondent submits, plaint was returned on 27.02.1998. It was presented in the Munsiff's Court, Muvattupuzha on 02.04.1998.

4. The appellan

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top