- (1.) This is a plaintiff's revision petition against the order dated August 10, 1977, by the Additional District Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh, whereby the learned Judge held that he had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit against the defendants No. 1, M/s, Hawrah Insurance Company Ltd., and No. 3, M/s. Liberty Insurance Company Ltd., and the suit could proceed in his court only against defendant No. 2, M/s. General Insurance Society Ltd,
(2.) The plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 28,000, against the three insurance companies, namely, defendant No. 1, Hawrah Insurance Company Ltd., defendant No. 2, General Insurance Company, and defendant No. 3, Liberty Insurance Company Ltd., on the ground that all the three insurance companies had insured cotton seeds lying in the premises of the plaintiff at Sangariya, against fire etc., and the plaintiff had regularly deposited the premiums. However, unfortunately, on October 5, 1971, the cotton seeds caught fire and were damaged, on account of which the plaintiff assessed the damage at Rs. 28,000, and prayed that a decree for the said amount may be passed against the three insurance companies. There is no dispute that the Sangariya court had jurisdiction to entertain the suit aganist defendant No. 2, General Insurance Society Ltd. Defendants Nos. 1 and 3, however, raised an objection that according to condition No, 11 contained in the terms and conditions of the policies pertaining to Cotton Ginning and Pressing Factories and Cotton General Tariff Warrantees, the suit was triable by a competent court in the City of Delhi only. A similar condition was pleaded by the Hawrah Insurance Company Ltd. also. On the basis of the aforesaid conditions in the two policies, the lower court came to the conclusion that against defendants Nos. 1 and 3, the suit was not triable in Sangariya court,
(3.) It may be mentioned here that during the pendency of this revision petition, an application was submitted by the petitioner that all the defendant Insurance Companies have been nationalised and the businesses of the non-petitioners Nos, 1 to 3 have devolved upon the New India Assurance Company Ltd, and the National Insurance Company Ltd. It was, therefore, prayed that the New India Assurance Company and the National Insurance Company Ltd. may be substituted in place of the original defendant-non-petitioners. Accordingly, this Court by its order dated July 19, 1978, directed that the New India Assurance Company Ltd. and the National Insurance Company Ltd. may be substituted as non-petitioners,;