Territorial jurisdiction under Armed Forces Tribunal rules upheld where part of the cause of action arose in Delhi.

Rule 6 of the Armed Forces Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 2008 allows an original application to be filed where the applicant is posted, was last posted or attached, and also where the cause of action has arisen wholly or in part; these clauses operate independently. On the stated facts, a part of the cause of action arose in Delhi because the penalty order and appellate order were issued from Delhi and the relevant record was available there. The Delhi High Court noted that the doctrine of forum conveniens did not require transfer elsewhere because Delhi was itself a convenient forum. The Principal Bench at Delhi therefore had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the application.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Principal Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal at Delhi had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the original application and whether, on the facts, Delhi was the convenient forum.

Analysis: Rule 6 of the Armed Forces Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 2008 permits filing where the applicant is posted, was last posted or attached, and also where the cause of action, wholly or in part, has arisen. The two clauses operate independently and one is not a special provision excluding the other. A part of the cause of action arose in Delhi because the penalty order and the appellate order emanated from Delhi, and the relevant record was available there. The principle of forum conveniens could not justify relegating the petitioner elsewhere because Delhi was itself the convenient forum on the facts.

Conclusion: The Principal Bench at Delhi had jurisdiction to entertain the original application, and Delhi was the convenient forum.

---