Territorial jurisdiction and forum conveniens defeated where only incidental acts occurred within the court's limits.

Territorial jurisdiction under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent depended on material facts forming part of the cause of action, and not on incidental or administrative acts. The employment contract was issued and acted upon outside the court's territorial limits, the resignation was accepted outside those limits, and the plaintiff's office was also outside jurisdiction. Consultation of lawyers at Chennai and salary payments from Chennai were treated as incidental and insufficient to found jurisdiction. Clause 13 of the appointment letter could not confer jurisdiction by consent, and the forum conveniens analysis also pointed away from the chosen court. The leave previously granted was therefore revoked.

---

---

Issues: Whether the leave granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent to institute the suit ought to be revoked for want of territorial jurisdiction and on the ground of forum conveniens.

Analysis: Cause of action consists of the bundle of material facts necessary to support the plaintiff's right to relief, and only those facts which are material to the claim can confer territorial jurisdiction. The place where the employment contract was issued and acted upon, the acceptance of resignation, and the plaintiff's office location were found to lie outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Court. The alleged consultation of lawyers at Chennai and the making of salary payments from Chennai were held to be merely incidental or administrative acts and not material facts forming part of the cause of action. Clause 13 of the appointment letter was read as referring to the competent court having jurisdiction over the relevant place and could not confer jurisdiction by consent. The principles of forum conveniens and balance of convenience were also applied, and the Court found that the suit had been brought before a forum lacking territorial nexus.

Conclusion: The leave previously granted was liable to be revoked, and the application for revocation was allowed.

---