Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226(2) attaches when even part of the cause of action arises within the court's limits.

Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226(2) extends to a High Court when any part of the cause of action arises within its limits, even if the dispute is otherwise connected to proceedings outside the State. Receipt of the impugned notices at Bengaluru, coupled with the attempted reopening of concluded assessments there and the threatened coercive action, was treated as sufficient to attract jurisdiction. The reasoning aligned Article 226(2) with the broad cause-of-action principle in Section 20(c) CPC. On that basis, the refusal to entertain the writ petition for want of jurisdiction was held unsustainable, and the petition was restored for decision on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court had territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India because a part of the cause of action arose within its jurisdiction.

Analysis: The appeal challenged dismissal of the writ petition on the ground that no part of the cause of action arose within the territorial limits of the High Court. The impugned notices were admittedly received at Bengaluru, the concluded assessments were sought to be reopened there, and the writ petition sought relief against the threatened coercive action. The principle governing Article 226(2) permits invocation of jurisdiction where even a fraction of the cause of action arises within the Court's territory. The reasoning also drew support from the similarity between Article 226(2) and Section 20(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Conclusion: The High Court had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition, and the dismissal for want of jurisdiction was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The order refusing to entertain the writ petition was set aside and the writ petition was restored for disposal on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226(2) is attracted if any part of the cause of action arises within the Court's limits, including receipt of the impugned notice and the threatened infringement of the legal right there.

---