- (1.) THE impugned order of the lower appellate court holding that the suit of the petitioner was triable only by the courts in Jaipur, warrants no interference in revision.
(2.) THE petitioner filed a suit for the recovery of Rs. 32,800/- in the court at Amritsar. The amount claimed comprising Rs. 20,000/- as security deposited under the contract between the parties and the balance ammount of Rs. 12,800/- being the interest claimed thereon. The respondent, on appearance, filed an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. seeking stay of the proceedings on account of the arbitration clause in the agreement between the parties. An objection was also taken to the effect that the Court at Amritsar lacked jurisdiction to try the suit.
(3.) CLAUSE-27 of the agreement between the parties reads as under:" all legal proceedings, if necessity arises to institute by any of the parties (Corporation or the approved suppliers) shall have to be lodged in courts at Jaipur and nowhere else. " It was on the basis of this clause that both the courts below have held that the jurisdiction in the. matter lies only with the courts at Jaipur.;