https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233879 Under Article 226(2), territorial jurisdiction depends on whether pleaded facts are material, integral and directly connected to the relief sought. Incidental, trivial or unrelated local facts do not create a part of the cause of action. On the facts described, the presence of EFLU at Hyderabad and the allegation that it was not consulted at all stages of the tender were held insufficient, because the grievance was directed against respondents outside the State and the local respondent was not the real focus of relief. The writ petition was therefore held not maintainable for lack of territorial jurisdiction. en-us Wed, 03 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 May 2013 10:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233879 Under Article 226(2), territorial jurisdiction depends on whether pleaded facts are material, integral and directly connected to the relief sought. Incidental, trivial or unrelated local facts do not create a part of the cause of action. On the facts described, the presence of EFLU at Hyderabad and the allegation that it was not consulted at all stages of the tender were held insufficient, because the grievance was directed against respondents outside the State and the local respondent was not the real focus of relief. The writ petition was therefore held not maintainable for lack of territorial jurisdiction. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 03 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233879