When printed terms in sale order or consignment note will not govern jurisdiction of court?
United India Ins. Co. Ltd. v. Associated Transport Corporation Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. reported in MANU/KE/0008/1988 : AIR 1988 Kerala 36 was relied upon to contend that printed words in a consignment note subjecting to jurisdiction of particular Court when signed by only one party, in the absence of indicating any agreement between the parties to confer exclusive jurisdiction to a particular Court, printed words cannot oust jurisdiction of other Courts other than specified.
In order to understand whether a particular Court has jurisdiction or not, one has to see whether cause of action has arisen for the claim of the petitioner in this Court. The word 'cause of action' for all intent and purport must be understood as envisaged under Section 20(c) C.P.C. This is a well-settled principle. Cause of action is nothing but entire bundle of facts pleaded and the material and relevant facts alone constitute a cause of action. The facts must be relevant, integral and material so as to constitute cause of action. The cause of action need not arise always at one place. Depending upon facts and circumstances it can arise wholly or in part within the jurisdiction of one or several Courts. If cause of action has arisen at more than one place, definitely litigant will have the choice to institute proceedings at either of the places. So far as issuance of appropriate writ or direction, cause of action would refer to the ground or the basis pleaded by the petitioner. It is not necessary that respondents must be within the Court's jurisdiction where writ petition is instituted. If part of cause of action arises within the territorial limits of a Court, that Court can entertain action under Article 226(2) of the Constitution. It is also relevant to mention that the argument of lack of jurisdiction to entertain the matter is based on printed terms in the sale order or consignment note. There is nothing on record to show there was agreement between the parties to confer exclusive jurisdiction to a particular Court. In the absence of such material, printed words cannot oust jurisdiction of High Court and Supreme Court. Apparently it refers to Civil Court jurisdiction at Dhanbad and writ jurisdiction of High Court cannot be excluded. When the impugned order or action is personal, in the sense that it affects writ petitioner, then the situs of cause of action depend upon the relief claimed and would arise where the orders become effective or the action effected.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
APOT 421 of 2013, GA 2645 OF 2013 and W.P. No. 71 of 2010
Decided On: 10.04.2015
Appellants: Bharat Coking Coal Ltd.
Vs.
Respondent: Auroma Coke Ltd. and Ors.
Vs.
Respondent: Auroma Coke Ltd. and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:Dr. Manjula Chellur, C.J. and Arijit Banerjee, J.
Citation;AIR 2016(NOC)302 Cal
https://www.lawweb.in/2016/05/when-printed-terms-in-sale-order-or.html
