C PITCHEIYAN Vs. REGIONAL MANAGER CO OPTEX KOCHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all these cases a preliminary objection has been raised by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. The objection is that this Court has no power or jurisdiction to entertain these writ petitions under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and hence we have to decide this question at the outset.

(2.) The Regional Manager of the Tamil Nadu Handloom Weavers Co-operative Society Limited, Cochin issued demand notices to the petitioners-employees to remit the amount alleged to have been misappropriated by them on the basis of an enquiry report submitted by the Assistant Director of Handloom and Textiles, Nagarcoil. The appellant in Writ Appeal No. 2107/98 and the petitioners in O.P. Nos. 7774 and 8182 of 1998 are the three employees among others, we are concerned in these cases.

(3.) On behalf of the respondents it was contended that the cause of action for these cases arose outside the State of Kerala. First of all we have to find out the meaning of the expression 'cause of action'? Unless its meaning is known and the width of it is discerned the perceptivity may not be clear. Brett, J. said in Jay Cooke v. Henry S. Gill (1873) LR 8 CP 107 :"