The answer made by the respondents to this preliminary objection was that a part of the cause of action had arisen in Naini which was within the jurisdiction of the Court of Civil Judge, Allahabad and that Court had, therefore, jurisdiction to entertain tin suit and Clause 17 did number have the effect of ousting the jurisdiction of the Court of Civil Judge, Allahabad, because the Court in Jaipur City had numberjurisdiction to entertain the suit and it was number companypetent to the.
2 This appeal by special leave is directed against an order made by the High Court of Allahabad rejecting the revision application preferred by the appellant against an order made by the Court of Civil Judge, Allahabad holding that it had jurisdiction to entertain the suit filed by the respondents against the appellant claiming damages for the loss suffered by them in respect of the goods Carried by the appellant.
It appears that the truck in which the goods were carried met with an accident, as a result of which the goods were damaged and since the goods were delivered to the first respondent who were the endorsees of the companysignment numbere, in damaged companydition, the respondents, filed a suit claiming damages for the loss suffered by the first respondent.
The companysignment numbere companytained various terms and companyditions of the carriage and one of the terms and companyditions was that set in Clause 17 which provided that The Court in Jaipur City alone shall have jurisdiction in respect of all claims and matters arising sic under the companysignment or.
Notwithstanding this term of the Contract of Carriage, the suit was filed by the respondents in the Court of the Civil Judge, Allahabad which had jurisdiction over Naini, being a place where goods were to be delivered and were in fact delivered to the first respondent.
The appellant, therefore, raised an objection before the Court of the Civil Judge, Allahabad companytending that the Court had numberjurisdiction to entertain the suit since the Court in Jaipur City alone had jurisdiction by reason of the.
The appellant being aggrieved by this order made by the Civil Judge, Allahabad preferred a revision application in the High Court, but the High Court agreed with the view taken by the Court of Civil Judge.
The goods were entrusted by the companysignor to the appellant for, carriage at Baroda and under the companysignment , numbere issued by the appellant, the goods were to be carried to Naini.
Special leave granted.
The appellant there upon preferred the present appeal by special leave obtained from this Court.
parties by agreement to companyfer on the Court jurisdiction which it did number possess.
of the goods entrusted for transportation.
