PRABHAKARA KAMATH Vs. C M PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) he plaintiff in O.S. No. 80 of 1958 of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Cochin is the appellant before us. The Subordinate Judge after discussing the questions involved in Para.3 and 4 of his judgment said:

(2.) It is admitted that none of the defendants - resides within the jurisdiction of the Trial Court, and so the only way the plaintiff can sustain the suit before the Subordinate Judge is by invoking S.20 (c) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and by establishing that the cause of action for the suit, wholly or in part, arose within the jurisdiction of the court.

(3.) The lower court held - we think correctly - that the place of making the contract, the place of its breach or non performance and the place where money was payable under the contract, were all outside the jurisdiction of the court, and that no part of the cause of action arose within its jurisdiction. It was suggested to us that the correspondence which led to the contract, as far as the plaintiff was concerned, was from Mattancherry and that the said fact will give jurisdiction to the court of the Subordinate Judge of Cochin. We must say that we are unable to appreciate this contention.