- (1.) This revision filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the judgement/order dated 28.5.2015 passed in Regular Suit No. 2887 of 2014 whereby preliminary objection i.e. lack of territorial jurisdiction of the court below raised by the revisionist/defendant, giving rise to a preliminary issue, has been decided against him and the suit has been held to be rightly filed before the court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Mohanlalganj, Lucknow instead of returning the plaint for being filed before the court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Malihabad, Lucknow, within whose territorial jurisdiction the immovable property is situated.
(2.) The impugned order passed by the court below gives rise to the following questions of law: (1) Whether a preliminary issue relating to the territorial jurisdiction of a court can be framed on the basis of an objection raised by the defendant before filing a written statement and if yes, as to what would be the manner of deciding such an objection; (2) Whether the relief sought in the suit at hand essentially relates to a dispute in relation to immovable property and consequently the objection of territorial jurisdiction raised would be maintainable; (3) In a situation where relief sought by the plaintiff is partly or wholly not triable before the court where the suit is instituted, whether such a proceeding can be transferred by virtue of the powers conferred on this Court under Section 24 (5) of CPC to the court of competent jurisdiction instead of returning the plaint in terms of Order VII Rule 10A.
(3.) Background Briefly stated, facts of the case are that a suit for specific performance coupled with a relief of perpetual injunction was instituted before the court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Mohanlalganj and at the time of filing of the suit, the Munsarim, in terms of Rule 35 of General Rules (Civil), endorsed his report by making a specific mention that the immovable property described in the plaint was situated beyond the territorial jurisdiction of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Mohanlalganj but having regard to the cause of action set out in paragraph 34 of the plaint which recited the execution of sale agreement before the Sub-Registrar, Lucknow the territorial jurisdiction of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Mohanlalganj on that premise was reported as maintainable. At the time of admission of the suit, the plaintiff appears to have contested the report submitted by the Munsarim on the basis of factum of registration of sale agreement. The court recording, prima facie, satisfaction in the order dated 23.12.2014 proceeded to invite written statement/objections from the defendants, however, the question as to the territorial jurisdiction was left open to be dealt with after the written statement/objections were filed.;