K VENKATA PRASAD Vs. M SHAHNAZ ANANTAPUR DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Revision petitioner is the defendant in O.S. No. 34 of 2006 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri. The respondent herein/plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of money on the basis of a promissory note. The Revision petitioner/defendant filed the written statement denying the suit claim. It was specifically pleaded by him that the suit promissory note as well as the receipt were fabricated by the plaintiff. It was also contended that as the defendant was not residing within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri and as no cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the said Court, the suit was liable to be rejected.

(2.) After the issues were settled and the matter was coming up for cross-examination of P.W.I, the defendant filed I.A. No. 196 of 2009 under Order XIV Rule 5 of Code of Civil Procedure with a prayer to frame the additional issue "whether the Court has territorial jurisdiction to try the suit" and try the same as preliminary issue. The Plaintiff filed a counter opposing the said petition and the Court below by order dated 20.08.2009 dismissed the petition. Aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed by the defendant.

(3.) I have heard the learned Counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record.