Sahidullah Munshi, J. - (1.) Ga No.2998 of 2016 has been filed by the defendant complaining that this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit and has also prayed for revocation of the leave granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. In the application, the defendants have contended that the MoU dated 26th March, 2013 incorporates by reference the terms and conditions of the NIT of North Eastern Coalfield Ltd which is essentially the terms and conditions and/or instruction to a bidder of North Eastern Coalfield Ltd. A copy of the said NIT of North Eastern Coalfield Ltd has been annexed and marked as letter 'B'.
(2.) The claim of the plaintiff as pleaded in the plaint arises out of the said MoU dated 26th March, 2013, which mentions a forum selection clause vesting exclusive jurisdiction with Guwahati High Court in the State of Assam. The contract has been performed in Assam. Part payment has been made in Assam. Therefore, the forum selection clause is operative and the plaintiff cannot maintain the suit in this Hon'ble High Court, in breach of the forum selection clause. It has been further contended that part of the alleged cause of action has arisen at Assam which will be evident from the plaint. In the said application, it has been further contended that as no part of cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court, leave under clause 12 of the Letters Patent may be revoked. It is the further case made out by the defendant that paragraph 2 of the plaint refers to an oral agreement which, however, is to enter into further agreement and, therefore, cannot be the basis of the cause of action for the plaintiff in this suit. In any event, according to defendant, from the plaint it does not transpire that the plaintiff sues on this agreement. According to the defendant no part of the cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court and the suit cannot be entertained.
(3.) Affidavit-In-Opposition has been filed to the application filed by the defendants. The plaintiff has denied the case made out by the defendant and has contended that this Court is competent enough to try this suit. Cause of action has arisen partly within and partly outside the jurisdiction of this Court and, therefore, there is no wrong in selecting the jurisdiction of the Calcutta High court in filing the suit.;