Territorial jurisdiction objection fails without proof of failure of justice under section 21 CPC

An objection to territorial jurisdiction cannot be entertained in appeal merely because it was raised at the earliest opportunity in the trial court; section 21(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure also requires proof that the objection caused a consequent failure of justice. As the record showed no material of prejudice and none was demonstrated, the objection could not be sustained. The appellate court was therefore not competent to consider the territorial objection on its own merits in the absence of this essential requirement.

---

---

Issues: Whether an objection to the place of suing could be entertained in appeal without proof of consequent failure of justice under section 21(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Analysis: The objection to territorial jurisdiction had been raised at the earliest opportunity in the trial court, but section 21(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure requires, in addition, proof that the objection has resulted in a consequent failure of justice. The record disclosed no material showing any such prejudice, and none was demonstrated before the Court. In the absence of this essential requirement, the appellate court was not competent to entertain the objection even if it were otherwise arguable on merits.

Conclusion: The jurisdictional objection could not be sustained and the lower appellate courts ought not to have entertained it.

---