BATA SHOE CO LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revisional application raises a short but important question as to the jurisdiction of the Court of Small Causes at Bombay to entertain a suit against the Union of India representing the B. B. and C. I. Railway having its head office at Bombay. The suit has been filed to recover Rs. 844-7-0 as the value of certain goods. The plaintiffs' case is that these goods were sent by the plaintiff-company from Agra Fort to Bikaner to be carried over by the B. B. and C. I. Railway. In the process of transport, the full consignment was damaged and was not delivered to the consignee. The value of the goods short-delivered is claimed by the plaintiffs as damages from the Union of India.

(2.) FOR the defendant a preliminary point of jurisdiction was raised. It was urged on their behalf that, since the cause of action had accrued wholly outside the jurisdiction of the Court of Small Causes, it was not competent to that Court to entertain the present suit. This plea was met by the plaintiffs on the ground that the Union of India carries on business within the local limits of the Bombay Small Cause Court within the meaning of Section 18, Sub-section (b), Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, 15 of 1882, and if that be so, the Court would have jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The learned trial Judge upheld the plaintiffs' contention, found in their favour that he had jurisdiction to entertain the suit and decreed the claim as made in the plaint. When the matter was taken by the defendant before the Full Court under Section 38, Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, the learned Judges who heard the application came to the conclusion that the Union of India could not be said to be carrying on business within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court of Small Causes, and so they held that the Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. On that view, the application for summons presented by the plaintiffs to the trial Court was ordered to be returned to him for presentation to the proper Court. That is how the short question which we have to decide in the present revisional application is whether the Union of India, which represents the B. B. and C. I. Railway having its Head Office at Bombay, can be said to carry on business within the meaning of Section 18, Sub-section (b), Presidency Small Cause Courts Act.

(3.) SECTION 18 (b) confers jurisdiction on the Small Cause Court to try ail suits of a civil nature within its pecuniary jurisdiction where all the defendants at the time of the institution of the suit actually and voluntarily reside, or carry on business or personally work for gain, within the local limits of the Court. The words used in this Sub-section are identical with the words used in Section 20 Civil P. C. and substantially similar to the words used in Clause 12 of the Letters Patent of this Court. The clause "carry on business" in reference to the Government of India has been judicially interpreted by the Calcutta and the Madras High Courts. But there is no reported decision of this Court where this question has been considered. We may, therefore, first consider the clause itself apart from judicial authority.