RAMDAS Vs. FIRM LAXMICHAND KASHIRAM OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS an appeal by the plaintiff Ramdas against an order of the learned Civil Judge, returning the plaint for presentation to the proper court under O. VII, r. 10 C. P. C.

(2.) THE plaintiff Ramdas, a resident of Jodhpur, placed an order with the defendant firm Laxmichand Kashiram who are sugar agents and carry on business in Delhi for supply of a certain quantity of sugar. It appears that the plaintiff made certain inquiries from the defendant in or about June, 1948, as a result of which the latter replied that it could book the plaintiff's orders if it received an advance money at the rate of Rs. 5/- per bag. THE plaintiff accordingly sent a sum of Rs. 400/- to the defendant firm and asked them to supply 100 bags of sugar. THE plaintiff also stated that he was remitting only Rs. 4/- per bag as advance money instead of Rs. 5/- and pointed out that the defendant firm had accepted smaller advances from other firms. THE plaintiff wrote to the defendant to the above effect on the 15th June, 1948; and sent a subsequent reminder on the 23rd June, 1948. In reply the defendant wrote a letter dated 26th June, 1949 in which it stated that it was arranging execution of the plaintiff's order and pointed out that there was a paucity of wagons and, therefore, there might be delay in the despatch. It hoped, however, that it would be able to arrange despatch at an early date. As it transpired, the defendant failed to execute the order. THE result was that the plaintiff instituted the present suit for recovery of the advance money of Rs. 400- plus Rs. 28/- as interest at the rate of 6% per annum and a further sum of Rs. 10/7/-as incidental charges; the total amount thus coming to Rs. 468/7/ -. THE defendant resisted the suit on a number of grounds with which I am not concerned in the present appeal. THE only ground material for the determination of the present appeal and to which reference must be made was one relating to jurisdiction. THE defendant's contention was that as the entire cause of action had arisen in Delhi, the Jodhpur courts had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. THE trial court decided this issue in favour of the plaintiff and decreed the entire suit. THE defendant took an appeal from the decision of the learned Munsiff to the learned Civil Judge, Jodhpur, who reversed the finding of the trial court on the point of jurisdiction and ordered the return of the plaint for presentation to the proper court. This is an appeal from the above judgment.