MULDER INDIA PVT LTD Vs. ALEMBLE GLASS INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant/plaintiff has come before this Court challenging order dated 8-12-2003 passed by the XXVI Additional City civil Judge, Mayo Hall Unit, Bangalore, in O. S. No. 15623/2000 returning the plaint in the said suit to the plaintiff, for presentation before the proper Court having jurisdiction over the subject matter of the suit.

(2.) FOR the sake of convenience the parties will be referred in their ranks assigned to them before the trial Court.

(3.) THE brief facts of the case is that, the plaintiff is a industrial unit in Bangalore, manufacturing and supplying indentors, labels of decorative laminations called "decals transfers" for transferring such labels on to glass and ceramic wares at their manufacture by the respective manufacturers of such wares. The first defendant company is manufacturing and selling varieties of glassware globally with its subordinate offices located countrywide, including in Bangalore; that the defendants after negotiations with the plaintiff had placed the purchase order bearing No. AGI/ ntk/835025 dated 14-10-1998 with the plaintiff for the purpose of manufacture and delivery of 4620 sheets of 'blue Bear Design glass Decals'. The said agreement entered into between the parties is subject to terms and conditions of supply printed overleaf and the same among other conditions contains that 'all disputes subject to Vadodara jurisdiction'. It is further admitted fact that the defendants cancelled the purchase order for supply of 1770 sheets of 'decal Transfers' after taking delivery of 2850 sheets of 'decal Transfers' and a dispute has arisen between the parties in furtherance of the said agreement entered into between them. Therefore the plaintiff has filed a suit for declaration that, the recession of the agreement of sale made, by the defendant with the plaintiff, by cancelling the purchase order placed by the defendant on the plaintiff in respect of 1770 of 'decals transfers' by the defendants' fax message dated 27-11-1998 is illegal and void, resulting in breach of contract committed by the defendants, and praying for the consequential relief by way of recovery of damages in the sum of Rs. 2,28,075/- along with interest and costs. On appearance before the trial Court the defendants filed common written statement denying the plaint averments and contended that in view of the above said clause in the agreement between the parties the Courts in vadodara alone has jurisdiction to try the dispute between the parties and that the Court below is barred from trying the said suit. From the materials placed before it the Court below has framed in all 8 issues and among them issue No. 5 is a preliminary issue, framed with regard to the territorial jurisdiction of the court below to try the said suit. After hearing both the parties and considering the documents placed before it the Court below passed order on the said preliminary issue, which is impugned herein, ordering to return the plaint in the said suit to the plaintiff-appellant herein, for presenting the same before the proper court. Hence, being aggrieved the plaintiff/ appellant has come up with this appeal challenging the legality and correctness of the said order passed by the Court below.