Anil Chanana v. Suresh Gupta

$~6 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CS(OS) 1039/2014 ANIL CHANANA ..... Plaintiff Through Ms. Payal Chawla and Mr. Maneesh Gumber, Advocates versus SURESH GUPTA ..... Defendant Through

CORAM:

SH. ANIL KUMAR SISODIA (DHJS), JOINT REGISTRAR (JUDICIAL)

O R D E R

% 09.08.2016 File has been received from the Office of Ld. District Judge (South), Saket Courts, Delhi.

I have perused the order dated 26.05.2016 which states that t defendant is not residing within the jurisdiction of South District. Perusal of the record shows that this is a suit for recovery filed by the plaintiff. Defendant is the resident of Jammu & Kashmir. In para 13 of the plaint, plaintiff has averred that the cause of action arose Delhi when defendant signed letter dated 26.10.2009 in the office of the plaintiff at Delhi.

It is further averred that the cause of action also arose when the defendant made part payments towards the repayment of the loan. Thus from the bare perusal of the averments as well as letter dated 26.10.2009, it is clear that part of cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of South District.

Hence, the courts at South District have jurisdiction to try the matter.

Registry is directed to send the complete records to the Ld. District Judge (South), Saket Courts on 5th September, 2016.

Parties shall appear before Ld. District Judge (South), Saket Courts on the next date of hearing.

ANIL KUMAR SISODIA (DHJS) JOINT REGISTRAR (JUDICIAL) AUGUST 09, 2016 savita