ARUN MONGA,J. - (1.) Plaintiff-petitioner herein is aggrieved by an order dated 30.08.2019 whereby suit for recovery for an amount of Rs.7,28,705/- has been dismissed on the ground of territorial jurisdiction. The defendants-respondents were proceeded ex-parte in the suit and after adducing of ex-parte evidence by the plaintiff, the order impugned herein was passed by the trial Court.
(2.) The operative part of the impugned order reads as below:- "14. In view of above discussion, it is concluded that neither the defendant resides in the Chandigarh nor the cause of action wholly or in part has accrued within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore, the present Civil Court does not have the jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present suit. Consequently, it is held that this suit is not maintainable before this Court due to lack of jurisdiction. Hence, the plaintiff is not entitled for the relief of recovery claimed by him before this Court.75. In view of above discussion, it is concluded that the plaintiff has been failed to prove its case. Hence, the plaintiff is not entitled for the relief claimed by him. Consequently, the suit filed by the plaintiff fails and it is hereby dismissed with costs. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance. "
(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, I am in agreement with his submission that, at worst, even if the trial Court at Chandigarh lacked the territorial jurisdiction, plaint ought to have been returned to the plaintiff instead of dismissal of the entire suit, though he also argues that trial Court had requisite jurisdiction.;