RAJENDRA PRASAD Vs. COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 19.9.2008 passed by learned third Additional District Judge, Fast Track, Shahdol, Beohari, District Shahdol dismissing Civil Suit No. 5B/2008, this appeal has been filed by the appellant/plaintiff.

(2.) NO exhaustive statements of fact are required to be narrated for the purpose of disposal of this appeal. Suffice it to say that a money suit has been filed by the plaintiff/appellant against the defendants/respondents. In the written statement interalia an objection has been raised by respondents 2 and 3 that Beohari Court is not having territorial jurisdiction.

(3.) SHRI Alok Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant submits that if the Beohari Court is not having any territorial jurisdiction, in such a situation the plaint ought to have been returned to the plaintiff/appellant to file it before the appropriate Court having territorial jurisdiction. In this regard learned counsel has invited my attention to Order 7 Rule 10 CPC and also the decision of Supreme Court R.S.D.V. Finance Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Shree Vallabh Glass Works Ltd. AIR 1993 SC 2094.