SONTINENI SIVAJI Vs. VANITAS DREAMLINE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the order dtd. 7/2/2019, in I.A. No.902 of 2015 in O.S. No.587 of 2012 on the file of II Addl. District Judge, Visakhapatnam.

(2.) The petitioner represents that he is a film artist and is permanent resident of Hyderabad. The petitioner, who is the defendant in the suit in O.S. No.587 of 2012, filed I.A. No.902 of 2015, seeking return of the plaint, on the ground, that under the terms and conditions of agreement dtd. 3/2/2012, that was entered into by the petitioner/defendant and the respondent/plaintiff, any dispute or differences arising out of the agreement shall be subject to the jurisdiction of competent Court at Hyderabad.

(3.) The petitioner contends that the respondent herein filed a suit against him claiming damages of Rs.33,22,400.00, basing on the agreement dtd. 3/2/2012, executed by and between them. The petitioner further contends that the entire cause of action for filing of the present suit has arisen at Hyderabad, and even as per terms of the agreement, the same should have been filed at Hyderabad. In as much as the learned II Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam, lacks jurisdiction to entertain the present suit, therefore sought for return of the plaint.