ICICI LIMITED MUMBAI Vs. DURGA BANSAL FERTILIZERS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMIT the learned Counsel for respondent No. waives service. Service on other respondents is not necessary for deciding the controversy which is the subject matter of this Appeal. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, after hearing their submissions, we proceed to finally decide the Appeal.

(2.) THE appellants are the original plaintiffs. They were granted leave to institute the suit in this Court under Clause XII of the Letters Patent in respect of the cause of action which had not arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Respondent No. 1 filed chamber Summons seeking revocation of leave granted under Clause XII of Letters Patent on the ground that no part of the cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court. The Chamber Summons has been dismissed, inter alia, holding that it cannot positively be held that the Bombay High Court has no jurisdiction. On this finding, the Chamber Summons for revocation has been found to be devoid of merits. The learned Single Judge has, however, clarified that the observations made in the impugned order are prima facie and only for the purpose of considering the application for revocation of leave and further, the defendants will be at liberty to take necessary objection under section 9-A of the Code of civil Procedure and all rights and contentions will be open to the defendants. The original plaintiffs is in Appeal before us, aggrieved, of course not by the dismissal of the Chamber Summons, but by the liberty as aforesaid granted to the defendants.

(3.) IT is contended that in view of the liberty granted, there will be a second round of arguments on the question of jurisdiction when such an objection is taken by the defendants under Section 9-A of the Code of Civil Procedure.