Territorial jurisdiction in damages claims includes resultant loss and injury as part of the cause of action.

Section 19 of the Code of Civil Procedure governs suits for compensation for wrong done to person or movable property where the wrong occurs within one court's jurisdiction and the defendant resides or carries on business within another, allowing forum choice. The phrase "wrong done" is not limited to the initial wrongful act; in a damages claim, the resulting loss and injury are part of the cause of action because compensation cannot be claimed without proof of damage. Even apart from Section 19, resultant damage may also constitute part of the cause of action under Section 20(c). The Akola Court's jurisdiction was therefore correctly upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in a suit for compensation for wrong done to person or movable property, the Court within whose jurisdiction the plaintiff suffered loss and damage had territorial jurisdiction under Section 19 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Analysis: Section 19 is a specific provision governing suits for compensation for wrong done to the person or to movable property. The qualifying words require that the wrong be done within the jurisdiction of one court and that the defendant reside or carry on business within the jurisdiction of another court for the plaintiff to have a forum choice. The phrase "wrong done" is not confined to the initial wrongful act alone. In a compensation claim, the resultant loss and damage are an essential part of the cause of action, because no claim for damages can succeed without proof of injury and its effect. Even apart from Section 19, the resultant damage would form part of the cause of action within Section 20(c).

Conclusion: The jurisdiction of the Akola Court was rightly upheld because the plaintiff's loss and damage within that jurisdiction formed part of the cause of action. The revision was without merit.

---