M.R. INTERNATIONAL, PROPRIETORSHIP FIRM THR. ITS PROPRIETOR RATILAL SANGANI Vs. GULJAG INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned counsel for the petitioner assailing the order dtd. 16/1/2019 submits that while rejecting the application moved by it under Order VII Rule 10 CPC seeking to raise the issue of territorial jurisdiction, the Court below has erroneously opined that the issue would be decided subsequently. It is submitted that the said issue could have been entertained by allowing the application and converting the suit into a regular suit.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and find that the concerned Trial Court has found that part of cause of action arises in the territorial jurisdiction of the said Court in terms of the provisions of Sec. 20(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure and prima facie as the case is at the initial stage, such verdict cannot be given that the jurisdiction does not lie.

(3.) This Court is in full agreement with the observations as it is the settled law at the stage of moving an application under Order VII Rule 10 CPC, only the averments made in the plaint would be taken into consideration.