(1.) By means of this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the defendant-petitioner prays for the following reliefs: It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to set aside the order dated 25.5.2005. passed by Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Budaun in O.S. No. 64/98, Arvind Kumar Gupta v. Parmanand Agrawal, order dated 16.4.2005, passed in Civil Revision No. 38/2005 passed by District Judge, Budaun, Parmanand Agrawal v. Arvind Kumar Gupta, and order dated 1.3.2005, passed by Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Budaun. It is further prayed that the trial court be directed to decide the preliminary issue of territorial jurisdiction first. Otherwise the applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.
(2.) The facts, as narrated in the writ petition, are that plaintiff filed a suit against the petitioner-defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs. 66,626 in the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) Budaun, which has been registered as Case No. 64 of 1998. As per the case set up by the plaintiff/contesting respondent it had been alleged inter alia amongst others that the plaintiff is a supplier of Dal Mill Machinery and its spare parts. The said Enterprise is being run in the name and style of M/s. Shakti Enterprises. On 19.12.1994, the defendant/applicant had placed an order with the plaintiff/contesting respondent regarding the supply of certain machinery part valued at Rs. 1,04,760. The delivery of the afore-placed order was made to the defendant/applicant on 8.2.1995 at Latur. Plaintiff/contesting respondent was also paid an amount of Rs. 40,000 the payment of which was also made in Latur. It was further alleged that the defendant/applicant on 10.2.1995 had assured to pay the balance amount within a week. However, when on 19.2.1995, the plaintiff/contesting respondent went to Latur to take payment, the defendant/applicant forcibly obtained a note from the plaintiff/contesting respondent as to have received the balance amount. Moreover the defendant/applicant with the help of certain local persons threatened the plaintiff/respondent with dire consequences and wowed him away. A legal notice dated 28.3.1995 was also sent, to which a false and concocted reply was made by the defendant/ applicant. On the aforesaid ground the plaintiff/contesting respondent sought a decree from the Civil Judge (Senior Division) Budaun for recovery of the balance amount payable, alongwith penal interest totalling Rs. 66,626.
(3.) The petitioner-defendant contested the aforesaid suit by filing a written statement. A preliminary objection was taken by the defendant-petitioner regarding the maintainability of the present proceeding at Budaun. It was alleged amongst others that the Budaun Civil Court had no territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate and entertain the aforesaid suit. In the written statement the defendant-petitioner alleged that he was carrying on business in the name and style of Maharashtra Dal Industries situated in Udgir, district Latur Maharashtra. The plaintiff-contesting respondent had entered into a contract with the defendant/ applicant regarding delivery of certain machinery at Udgir, Latur, Maharashtra. The said order was placed at Udgir district Latur Maharashtra itself. It was further alleged that a sum of Rs. 40,000 cash was paid to the plaintiff/contesting respondent on 8.2.1995 at Udgir itself. On the said ground it was alleged that no part of the cause of action had arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of the Budaun court which as such had no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the aforesaid suit.