Rajendra Singh Tomar vs Bharat Sarkar Dwara Sachiv
2023 Latest Caselaw 13412 MP

                                      1
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          AT GWALIOR
                               WA No. 1455 of 2022
          (RAJENDRA SINGH TOMAR Vs BHARAT SARKAR DWARA SACHIV AND OTHERS)

Dated : 17-08-2023
       Shri M.P.S. Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for the appellant.

       Shri Praveen Newskar, learned Deputy Solicitor General for the
respondents.

This intra-Court appeal under Section 2(1) of Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyalaya (Khand Nyay Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 is directed against the order dated 15th September, 2022 passed in Writ Petition No.2550 of 2004

by the learned Single Judge.

Learned Single Judge has non-suited the appellant on the ground of territorial jurisdiction and has ruled that place of residence of appellant where the impugned order was served shall not be construed as giving rise to fraction of cause of action to ascertain territorial jurisdiction.

Learned counsel for the appellant made sincere efforts to persuade this Court that even though the appellate order dated 06-08-2023 served upon the petitioner at District-Morena; his place of residence, was passed by the authority at Neemuch (falling within the territorial jurisdiction of Indore Bench of

High Court of M.P.), the Writ Court at Gwalior Bench could have also entertain the writ petition as District-Neemuch (wherefrom the appellate order was issued) and District-Morena (where the said order was received by the petitioner) do fall within the territorial limits of the State of M.P. over which the High Court of M.P. exercises its jurisdiction. He further submitted that the writ petition No.2550 of 2004 has been pending before this Court for last almost 19 years and now at this distance of time, the writ petition could not have been

dismissed on 15th September, 2022 for want of territorial jurisdiction.

Per contra, Shri Newskar, learned Solicitor General for the respondents submits that the objection as regards territorial jurisdiction was raised in the counter-affidavit filed as far back as in the year 2008. The appellant chose not to take remedial measures to go to appropriate forum. Learned counsel while referring to the Judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2007(11) SCC 335 and AIR 1961 SC 532 contends that residence of appellant does not determine the territorial jurisdiction of this Court until and unless cause of action or part of cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of the Gwalior Bench. He further submits that none of the relevant considerations

i.e. such facts which are material, essential or integral exist on record giving rise to part of cause of action to the Bench at Gwalior.

We are in agreement with Shri Newskar, learned Solicitor General. At this stage, Shri Raghuvanshi seeks indulgence for deferment of hearing as he intends to file an application before Hon'ble Chief Justice for consideration of his sincere prayer for hearing of Writ Appeal by the Gwalior Bench.

Without commenting upon the contentions so made, we simply adjourn the case.

List this case after four weeks.

     (ROHIT ARYA)                                         (DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)
        JUDGE                                                      JUDGE

vc
     VARSHA CHATURVEDI
     2023.08.18 10:06:56
     +05'30'