9911796707
TMI Blog1934 (3) TMI 30X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... him. The other contention raised by the plaintiff need not be referred to for purposes of this Revision Petition. The defendant denied having received any intimation from the plaintiff before they sent the goods that the goods were not to be sent by V.P.P. The defendant also contended that the Court had no jurisdiction to try the suit since the cause of action arose at Madras and not within the jurisdiction of the trial Court, namely, the District Munsif's Court of Tiruvarur. With reference to those contentions two important points arose for determination in the lower Court : (1) Whether the plaintiff was right in refusing to take delivery of the goods, the receipt for which was sent to him by V.P.P. (2) Whether the Court had no jurisd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lusion of the learned District Munsif is wrong because the offer to send the goods is accepted by Ex. 2 at Vijayapuram within the jurisdiction of the Tiruvarur Court. In Kamisetti Subbiah v. Katha Venkatawamy (1904) 27 Mad. 355 it is stated: Under the Contract Act, where the proposal and acceptance are made by letters, the contract Is made at the time when and at the place where the letter of acceptance is posted. 4. Exhibit 2 was posted at Vijayapuram. It would follow from this that the contract was made in Vijayapuram. Another -circumstance having a bearing on the question of jurisdiction is also referred to by the learned District Munsif in this paragraph. He first states, that the goods had to be consigned to this place thereby ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sdiction of the Tiruvarur Court but for the fact that the goods were sent per V.P.P. Having regard to the decision just quoted I must hold that the contract was intended to be performed at the place of business which is within the jurisdiction of the District Munsif's Court of Tiruvarur. It follows from the above considerations that in the present case the contract was completed at the place of his business which is within the jurisdiction of the Tiruvarur Court and the parties intended that the performance was to be there. Under Section 20, Civil P.C. ...every suit shall be instituted in a Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction Clause (c) the cause of action wholly or in part arises. 6. In Expl. 3 which appears in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jurisdiction of the Subordinate Judge's Court at Surat where the suit was filed. In support of the conclusion that the cause of action arose at Surat be also relied on another circumstance, namely, that owing to the breach of contract the amount which the plaintiff was seeking to recover became a debt received by defendant 1 in that case. Then he points out that Section 49. Contract Act, deals with the place of performance, and the principle laid down there is that where no place is fixed for the performance of the promise, it is the duty of the debtor to apply to the creditor to appoint a reasonable place for the performance of the promise and to perform it at such a place. If the debtor fails to apply, then as pointed out by the Ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
