Published on: February 1, 2024 at 19:02 IST
Court: High Court of Delhi
Citation: Dura-Line India Pvt. Ltd. V. BPL Broadband Network Pvt. Ltd. (2003)
Honourable High Court of Delhi has held that the jurisdiction of the Court in matter of a contract will depend on the sits of the contract and the cause of action arising through connecting factors. It is held that the performance of a contract is part of cause of action and a suit in respect of the breach can always be filed at the place where the contract should have been performed or its performance completed. If the contract is to be performed at the place where actions are to be rendered and payment is to be made by the agent, then part of cause of action arises where money is expressly or impliedly payable under a contract. In cases of repudiation of a contract, the place where repudiation is received is the place where the suit would lie in accordance with Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
10. Learned counsel for the plaintiff has also explained that to avail of benefit in sales tax some of the invoices carried the legend, “subject to Goa jurisdiction.” Most of the invoices carried the legend, “subject to Delhi jurisdiction”. Apart from this, Clause 10, as noticed above, confined the jurisdiction to New Delhi, as per the invoice raised after issuance of the purchase order. Payments have also been made at New Delhi. Undoubtedly, this is a case, where the material part of cause of action, namely, offer emanated from Delhi, acceptance by issuance of purchase order was received at Delhi. Contract was concluded at New Delhi. The payments have been received at Delhi. In a case, where the purchase orders or in voices carry conflicting clauses purporting to have exclusion of jurisdiction, at variance, provisions of Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure are applicable to resolve the issue.
12. The contract having been concluded in Delhi, payments being received in Delhi, material part of cause of action had arisen in Delhi. Delhi Courts would have jurisdiction, even if the term of invoice conferring exclusive jurisdiction to Goa is not considered. The plea and objection of defendant of lack of jurisdiction is devoid of merit.
Drafted By Abhijit Mishra