Territorial jurisdiction in electronic funds transfer dishonour cases depends on the complaint's nexus, not the drawer's head office.

For dishonour proceedings arising from an electronic funds transfer, jurisdiction is governed by the statutory scheme applying Chapter XVII of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 through section 25(5) of the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007, together with section 142(2)(a) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The complaint disclosed a territorial nexus with Jaipur because the transfer mandate was given for credit to the complainant's account there. The fact that the petitioner's head office and the underlying loan transaction were situated at Delhi did not justify transfer. The transfer request was therefore rejected and the proceeding was retained at Jaipur.

---

---

Issues: Whether the complaint arising from dishonour of electronic funds transfer proceedings was liable to be transferred on the ground that the petitioner's head office and the underlying loan transaction were situated at Delhi, or whether jurisdiction lay at Jaipur where the credit account was located.

Analysis: Section 25(5) of the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 applies Chapter XVII of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 to dishonour of electronic funds transfer. Section 142(2)(a) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 governs the place where the complaint may be lodged, and the complaint allegations indicated that the mandate for transfer was given for credit to the complainant's account located within the territorial jurisdiction of the Jaipur court. On that basis, no ground was made out for transfer.

Conclusion: The request for transfer was rejected and jurisdiction was found to lie at Jaipur.

Final Conclusion: The proceeding was retained at the forum where the complaint disclosed the relevant territorial nexus, and the transfer request failed.

Ratio Decidendi: For dishonour proceedings relating to electronic funds transfer, jurisdiction is determined by the statutory scheme applying Chapter XVII of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and by the complaint's territorial nexus under Section 142(2)(a), not merely by the location of the drawer's head office or the loan transaction.

---