Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether leave granted under clause 12 of the Letters Patent should be revoked on the ground that no part of the cause of action arose within jurisdiction and the balance of convenience favoured the defendants.
Analysis: The plaint was examined to determine whether any substantive part of the cause of action arose within the High Court's jurisdiction. The receipt of the balance-sheet within Calcutta was held to be only a means by which the plaintiff obtained knowledge of the alleged investments and not a challenge to the balance-sheet itself. The pleadings did not disclose any clear averment that the company carried on business within jurisdiction through the stated office, and section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was held inapplicable to suits on the Original Side. On the facts pleaded, the company's registered office, books and records were outside jurisdiction, and the defendants would be put to serious inconvenience if required to defend the suit there. The plaintiff's choice of forum was therefore not conclusive where the balance of convenience and forum convenience pointed the other way.
Conclusion: Leave under clause 12 of the Letters Patent was rightly revoked and the defendants obtained the relief sought.