AXIS BANK LTD Vs. MPS GREENERY DEVELOPERS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This first miscellaneous appeal is at the instance of a defendant in a suit for declaration and injunction and is directed against Order No. 3 dated 10th March, 2010 passed by the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Calcutta, in Title Suit No. 1092 of 2010, thereby issuing a notice upon the appellant to show cause why the prayer of the respondent for temporary injunction should not be granted and also granting an ad interim order of injunction restraining the appellant from giving effect to its letter dated 4th March 2010 mentioned in the application for injunction until further order.

(2.) Instead of showing cause, or filing an application under Order 39 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure for vacating the interim order, the defendant has straightway come up with the present appeal.

(3.) Mr. Chatterjee, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant, at the very outset, has raised a pure question of law as to the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Trial Judge in entertaining the suit and the application for injunction. Mr. Chatterjee contends that he is quite alive to the position of law that as his client without showing any cause, or without filing any application under Order 39 Rule 4 of the Code has decided to prefer this appeal, he, at this stage, should accept the all the averments made in the plaint and in the application for injunction to be true and his endeavour before us will be to convince us that even if those are assumed to be true, the learned Trial Judge had no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit or grant of ad interim order of injunction.