RATTAN CLOTH HOUSE Vs. ANOOP UDAI WORKS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant filed a suit for the recovery of Rs. 6,23,602/ -. Notice of the suit was given to the respondents who appeared and filed a written statement. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed :

(2.) AGGRIEVED by the judgment, the defendants filed an appeal. This appeal was accepted on the ground that according to the agreement between the parties, the suit could be tried only at Jodhpur. Relying upon the decision in Globe Transport Corporation v. Triveni Engineering Works and Anr. , (1984)86 P. L. R. 259, the learned Single Judge accepted the appeal with costs throughout and set aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. The plaintiff has, thus, filed the present letters patent appeal.

(3.) Mr. Arun Jain, learned counsel for the appellant, has contended that the view taken by the learned Single Judge cannot be sustained in the circumstances of this case. Learned counsel has pointed out that after framing of the issues both sides had led evidence. No prejudice whatsoever has been caused to the defendant-respondents by the trial of the suit at Ludhiana. Consequently, the judgment and decree passed by the learned Single Judge should be reversed.