https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293723 Order 14 Rule 2 permits a court to decide a pure question of law as a preliminary issue, including territorial jurisdiction, but it does not permit mixed questions of law and fact to be tried in that manner. Territorial jurisdiction under Section 20 CPC depends on the plaint averments and whether part of the cause of action arose within the forum. On the pleaded facts, the alleged purchase of shares, payment of consideration, receipt of bonus shares, and non-receipt of the original shares at Calcutta disclosed part of the cause of action within Calcutta. The City Civil Court at Calcutta was therefore competent to try the suit, and the jurisdictional objection failed. en-us Mon, 11 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Feb 2021 09:46:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293723 Order 14 Rule 2 permits a court to decide a pure question of law as a preliminary issue, including territorial jurisdiction, but it does not permit mixed questions of law and fact to be tried in that manner. Territorial jurisdiction under Section 20 CPC depends on the plaint averments and whether part of the cause of action arose within the forum. On the pleaded facts, the alleged purchase of shares, payment of consideration, receipt of bonus shares, and non-receipt of the original shares at Calcutta disclosed part of the cause of action within Calcutta. The City Civil Court at Calcutta was therefore competent to try the suit, and the jurisdictional objection failed. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 11 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293723