JAYANT K. FURNISHERS Vs. JSL LIFESTYLE LIMITED, GURUGRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved by order dtd. 22/10/2021 passed by Civil Judge (Jr.Divn.), Gurugram dismissing their application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC for rejection of plaint in the civil suit filed by plaintiff JSL Lifestyle Ltd. against the defendants such defendants - Jayant K. Furnishers and others have brought the instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of that order.

(2.) Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the plaintiff had brought a suit for recovery against defendants contending that at request of defendants the plaintiff had supplied and installed stainless steel structures at the site of defendant No.1 and had raised various invoices from time to time; however, the defendants did not clear the dues of plaintiff despite demands, as such the plaintiff had filed the suit for recovery in the Court of Civil Judge(Sr.Divn.), Gurugram. With regard to jurisdiction of Civil Court at Gurugram, the assertions have been made in para No.14 of the following effect: 14. That the cause of action has accrued in Gurgaon, as the negotiations were held in Gurgaon and also the mutual agreement was arrived at in Gurgaon between the parties. The on-account payments were also received in Gurgaon and the Plaintiff has their office in Gurgaon and within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court. The invoices raised by the plaintiff from time to time provide for the jurisdiction of the Courts in Gurgaon in case of any dispute. As such, this Hon'ble Court has jurisdiction to try the present suit.

(3.) On getting notice, the defendants appeared and filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 read with Sec. 151 CPC for rejection of the plaint stating that the Court at Gurugram lacks territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit because as per own admission of the plaintiff none of the defendants have any place of business at Gurugram and they do not work for gain at that place; further stainless steel structure, the alleged subject matter of the suit was not installed within jurisdiction of the Court at Gurugram; even the invoices pertain to Noida address and there is nothing to show that the items were either delivered or installed within jurisdiction of the Court at Gurugram, rather it was at Mumbai.