- (1.) THIS is an appeal by M/s. Kanpur Sugar Supply Company, Kanpur, plaintiff, against an order of the learned Additional District Judge, Kanpur, allowing its appeal in respect of the special costs and at the same time directing that the plaint shall be re turned to the plaintiff for presentation to a competent court.
(2.) THE plaintiff had placed cer tain orders with Harsukh Lal and Brothers, Rajkot, as commission agent. Certain disputes arose in connection with these business transactions and the plain tiff instituted a suit at Kanpur, the suit being for accounts and also for the re covery of money. The trial court held that the suit was not cognizable by the Kanpur court and was also of the opinion that no amount was due to the plaintiff. The suit was, therefore, dismissed with costs and the plaintiff was further directed to pay Rs. 500/- as special costs. The plain tiff went up in appeal challenging both the orders. The learned Additional Dis trict Judge was of the opinion that the suit was not cognizable by Kanpur court and, therefore, directed return of the plaint. Even if it be assumed that a part of the cause of action arose at Kanpur, the present is a case where the plaintiff could not seek legal remedy be fore the courts at Kanpur. It was neces sary for him to institute the suit before the Rajkot Courts. In the hundis and also the bills and letters, it was clearly written at the top. 'subject to Rajkot jurisdiction only'. The point for consi deration is whether on the facts and cir cumstances of the present case, this amounted to a contract between the par ties that only Rajkot courts shall have the jurisdiction to entertain the suit.
(3.) A contract between the parties can be direct or implied. Where there is only one transaction between the par ties, it can be said that by accepting the hundi. or the bill, the receiver thereof was not agreeing to the condition that only Rajkot courts shall have the ex clusive jurisdiction over the dispute. He may accept the bill and take delivery of the goods to avoid unnecessary dis putes. But where in spite of the clear provision as to the exclusive jurisdiction of Rajkot courts, the party places a fresh order and accepts the condition, no other inference can be drawn except that both the parties had agreed that Rajkot juris alone shall have the exclusive jurisdic tion. In the instant case, there had been many transactions between the narties and as already mentioned above the words 'subject to Rajkot Courts only' were written on all the material docu ments including Hundis and bills. Con sequently, the plaintiff had agreed and the, eye of law there was a contract that the legal remedy in respect of the disputes can be sought before the Rajkot Courts only.;