- (1.) THIS is an application for revocation of leave granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. Three grounds have been urged: that no part of the plaintiff's cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this Court; that the forum selection clauses in the plaintiff's invoices required the suit not to be instituted before this Court; and, as an alternative to the first ground, that the balance of convenience is against the continuation of the suit in this Court.
(2.) THE suit is for price of goods sold and delivered. Paragraphs 4 and 7 of the plaint are the principal basis on which the territorial jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked. At paragraph 4 of the plant it is averred that purchase orders were placed by the defendant on the plaintiff at its office within jurisdiction where at the plaintiff accepted such orders. At paragraph 7 it is stated that part payments were made by the defendant to the plaintiff, and accepted by the plaintiff, at the plaintiff's office within jurisdiction. In addition, leave under Clause 12 has also been obtained on the basis of the averments in paragraph 15, which is a repetition of what has already been stated at paragraphs 4 and 7 of the plaint.
(3.) THE defendant suggests that no part of the plaintiffs cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. For such purpose, the defendant has denied that it placed purchase orders on the plaintiff's office within. The defendant submits that supplies were effected from factories of the plaintiff outside jurisdiction to the defendant outside jurisdiction and the averment at paragraph 4 of the plaint is too thin a thread for the suit to remain in this Court. Alternatively, it is submitted that even if a slender part of the plaintiff's cause of action arose within jurisdiction it would be inconvenient for the defendant to contest the claim at the trial, what with voluminous documents required to be hauled from far afield and necessary witnesses being put to hardship to travel to this Court.;