Principle of forum conveniens - Indian Laws - General

Principle of forum conveniens The doctrine of forum conveniens was elucidated by a full bench of this Court in Sterling Agro- 2012 (6) TMI 76 - DELHI HIGH COURT - LB where it was held as follows: In Black s Law Dictionary, forum conveniens has been defined as follows : The court in which an action is most appropriately brought, considering the best interests and convenience of the parties and witnesses. The concept of forum conveniens fundamentally means that it is obligatory on the part of the court to see the convenience of all the parties before it. The convenience in its ambit and sweep would include the existence of more appropriate forum, expenses involved, the law relating to the lis, verification of certain facts which are necessitous for just adjudication of the controversy and such other ancillary aspects. The balance of convenience is also to be taken note of. Be it noted, the Apex Court has clearly stated in the cases of Kusum Ingots- 2004 (4) TMI 342 - SUPREME COURT , Mosaraf Hossain Khan- 2006 (2) TMI 610 - SUPREME COURT and Ambica Industries- 2007 (5) TMI 21 - SUPREME COURT, about the applicability of the doctrine of forum conveniens while opining that arising of a part of cause of action would entitle the High Court to entertain the writ petition as maintainable. The principle of forum conveniens in its ambit and sweep encapsulates the concept that a cause of action arising within the jurisdiction of the Court would not itself constitute to be the determining factor compelling the Court to entertain the matter. While exercising jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the Court cannot be totally oblivious of the concept of forum conveniens. The Full Bench in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (supra) has not kept in view the concept of forum conveniens and has expressed the view that if the appellate authority who has passed the order is situated in Delhi, then the Delhi High Court should be treated as the forum conveniens. We are unable to subscribe to the said view. RIDDHIMA SINGH - 2023 (11) TMI 1216 - DELHI HIGH COURT This principle was further reiterated by a Division Bench of this Court in Sachin Hindurao Waze vs. UOI Ors. 2022 SCC OnLine Del 3287 wherein the Court held as under: 12. On a broad holistic assessment of decisions cited by the petitioner would show that there are practically two elements which have to be considered by any court while accepting jurisdiction to decide a writ petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution-firstly, if any part of the cause of action arises within its territorial jurisdiction; and secondly if the said court is the forum conveniens. Only a mere shred or an iota of a cause of action potentially clothing a particular High Court with jurisdiction [per Article 226(2) of the Constitution of India] to adjudicate a writ petition, ought not to encourage a court to accept such jurisdiction completely divorced and dehors an assessment of forum conveniens. This has been categorically articulated in decisions of this Court...