JAY ENGINEERING WORKS LTD Vs. RAMESH AGGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this order I propose to dispose of the above-mentioned two applications, both of which have been filed by the defendant seeking to oust the present suit from the jurisdiction of this court. Though the first application is styled as one under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the second as one under Section 21 of the Code, de hors their garb both applications are under order VII Rule 10 of the Code for return of the plaint on the ground that this Court is not clothed with territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

(2.) Although initially counsel for plaintiff sought to urge that Section 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure could be invoked only in the appellate and revisional forum and not in the original forum and, in any event, precludes a prayer for return of the plaint, subsequently he contended himself by urging that without prejudice to his aforesaid contentions and assuming both applications to be a case of "defective labelling", the merits of the defendant's plea of lack of jurisdiction may be gone into in the backdrop of the averments made in the plaint alone, without looking into the defence of the defendant.

(3.) Order VII Rule 1 of the Code makes it imperative for the plaintiff to incorporate in the plaint the particulars as to the facts constituting the cause of action and the facts showing the court has jurisdiction. It is, therefore, trite that the question of jurisdiction has to be decided by looking into the averments made in the plaint and not by the defence which may be set up by the defendant. It is also legally well-established that as cause of action is a bundle of facts which, if arises within the jurisdiction of the Court concerned empowers the Court to entertain the matter, it is not enough to look only at the paragraph of plaint concerning cause of action (or any other paragraph in isolation). The entire plaint must be taken into consideration and viewed in its entirety to determine the conferment of jurisdiction in the court concerned. Bearing in mind these broad principles, I embark upon an examination of the plaint.