ANSHUMAN PRASAD Vs. L I C OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) <DJG>N.PANDEY,J.</DJG> This is plaintiff's appeal against an order dated 27.11.1986 in Title Suit No. 216 of 1984 whereby the Additional Sub-ordinate Judge, Patna, held that the suit in question was not maintainable at Patna. Therefore, the plaint be returned for filing the same before a competent court having jurisdiction to try this suit.

(2.) There is no dispute that at the time when the cause of action for the suit arose, the plaintiff was transferred from Patna to Calcutta under for the orders, of the Managing Director, Life Insurance Corporation of India and joined at the Zonal Office, Calcutta on 24.1.1983. But after having filed a petition for leave, due to certain urgent work, he left Calcutta for home. Subsequently, the Zonal Manager, although treated the petitioner's absence as unauthorised, directed him to join on 7.2.1983. But later on considering the show cause of the petitioner, under the orders of the Managing Director, he was removed from service from 3.9.2983. Since the order of removal was communicated to the petitioner at Patna through the Divisional Manager, Patna, the present suit was filed before the 1st Sub-ordinate Judge, Patna, who had territorial jurisdiction.

(3.) It appears, an objection was taken by the respondents regarding maintainability of the suit since all the defendants were residing outsides this State and service of the petitioner was also determined at Calcutta. The learned court below, accepted the contention of the respondents and held since all the defendants are residing outside the State and the appellant was also, at the time of termination of service, served at Calcutta, therefore, for want of territorial jurisdiction, the suit was not maintainable at Patna.