AKSHAT KEDIA Vs. MLK RETAIL PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assails order dtd. 6/9/2022, passed by the learned District Judge (Commercial Court) ("the learned Commercial Court") in CS (Comm) 627/2019 (M/s MLK Mega Retail Pvt. Ltd. v. Akshat Kedia), whereby the application filed by the petitioner, as the defendant in the suit, under Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), has been dismissed.

(2.) The only ground on which the petitioner had predicated his application under Order VII Rule 10 of the CPC was that the suit was bad for want of territorial jurisdiction, as territorial jurisdiction, to adjudicate on the lis forming subject matter of the suit, vested in courts at Bangalore. The learned Commercial Court has observed that the issue would require leading of evidence and has, therefore, not agreed to return the petitioner's suit at the very outset under Order VII Rule 10 of the CPC. Nonetheless, the learned Commercial Court has protected the petitioners' interest by framing a specific issue as to whether the court of the learned Commercial Court had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

(3.) In my considered opinion, this petition is yet another example which illustrates the complete lack of comprehension regarding the exact scope and the ambit of jurisdiction vested in High Courts under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.