S.K. Mookherjee, J. - (1.) The present Revisional application challenges Order No. 16 dated January 3, 1991 passed by the learned Assistant District Judge, Bankura, in Money suit No. 22 of 1989 whereby the learned Assistant District Judge rejected an application under Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, made on behalf of the defendant which is the petitioner before this Court.
(2.) The learned Trial Judge, in passing the impugned order, substantially found that letter of the defendant/petitioner dated July 29, 1986 written to the plaintiff and received by the plaintiff within the territorial limits of his Court constituted apart of the cause of action.
(3.) We have heard Mr. R. Roy in support of the revisional application and Mr. Ranjit Banerjee on behalf of the plaintiffs-opposite parties. It has been contented by Mr. Roy upon a proper reading and construction of the plaint that the said letter could not form a part of the cause of action as the entire case factually proceeded upon wrongful retention or withholding of the Bank Draft which wrongful act having been committed beyond the territorial limits of the present Trial Court, the plaint was liable to be returned in terms of Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure.;