(1.) LEAVE granted.
(2.) THE appellant had initiated action in the Court of Subordinate Judge, Dhanbad for recovery of certain amounts said to be due from the first respondent. The appellant filed the case on a contract executed by the first respondent. On filing the suit for recovery of the amounts, the respondents raised the objection as regards the jurisdiction of the Court and placed reliance on Clause (21) of the contract. The trial Court returned the plaint for presentation to the proper Court by its order dated September 1, 1983. Thereon, the appellant carried the matter in revision to the High Court. The High Court in the impugned order made in C.R. No. 20/84 dated August 17, 1987 upheld the view of the trial Court and dismissed the revision. Thus, this appeal by special leave.
(3.) NORMALLY , the plea of jurisdiction of the Court is to be considered in accordance with Ss. 16 to 20 of CPC. Section 20 provides that subject to some limitations, every suit shall be instituted in a Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction - (a) the defendant, or each of the defendants where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of the suit, actually and voluntarily resides, or carried on business, or personally works for gain; or any of the defendants, where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of the suit, actually and voluntarily resides or carried on business or personally works for gain, provided that in such case either the leave of the Court is given, or the defendants who do not reside, or carryon business, or personally work for gain.