MANISH KUMAR Vs. PROMOD KUMAR & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a matter in which the trial court, vide the impugned judgement, has returned the plaint to the appellant/ plaintiff, on the ground that it did not have the territorial jurisdiction in respect of the matter. The appellant/ plaintiff had filed a suit for recovery in the sum of Rs. 7.48 lacs. Respondent no.1/ defendant no.1, who is the President of the Co-operative Group Housing Society, had, according to appellant no.1/ plaintiff no.1, induced her husband to invest a sum of Rs. 5.50 lacs; albeit on a refundable basis.

(2.) It is not disputed before me by counsels for the appellant / plaintiff and respondent no.1/ defendant no.1, that respondent no.2/ defendant no.2 has returned a sum of Rs. 12.70 lacs to Respondent no.1/ defendant no.1. This refund was made on 20.05.2005 vide cheque bearing no. 076169, drawn on IDBI Bank Ltd., Panchkula, Haryana. My attention in this behalf has been drawn by counsel for respondent no.1/defendant no.1 to, paragraph 9 of the written statement under the heading reply on merits.

(3.) The appellant/ plaintiff being aggrieved by the fact that money invested by them was not returned, instituted a suit for recovery from which the instant appeal arises.