SHAFIQUE-UR-REHMAN vs H.M. KHALID
This petition for leave to appeal challenges a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which transferred the petitioner's suit to a Civil Court in Gujranwala, where the respondent's suit for recovery of damages was already pending. The core legal question concerned the territorial jurisdiction of the court to adjudicate the dispute arising from a contract. The petitioner contended that the agreement was executed in Sahiwal, thereby conferring jurisdiction upon the courts there. However, the High Court found that the petitioner failed to substantiate this claim with evidence. Conversely, the court observed that the non-judicial stamp paper used for the agreement was purchased in Kamoke, District Gujranwala, and the payment via cheque also occurred there. Consequently, the High Court determined that the cause of action, prima facie, arose within the jurisdiction of the Gujranwala courts. The Supreme Court upheld this decision, finding no illegality or irregularity in the High Court's order. The petition was dismissed, affirming the principle that territorial jurisdiction is determined by the location where the cause of action arises, supported by verifiable evidence of the contract's execution.
- Does the purchase of non-judicial stamp paper in a specific district support the finding that a contract was executed within that jurisdiction?
- Can a court transfer a suit to another district if the cause of action is found to have arisen there?
- Is a party's unsubstantiated assertion regarding the place of contract execution sufficient to establish territorial jurisdiction?
' TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.---Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment, dated 14-10-2003, whereby the learned Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court, has transferred the suit filed by the petitioner to the Court of a learned Civil Judge, Gujranwala where respondent's suit for the recovery of damages is pending adjudication.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner for some time and have gone through the impugned judgment appended with this petition. It is reflected from the perusal thereof that the contract out of which the present proceedings have emanated was executed at Kamoke District Gujranwala and the cheque was also paid over there. The assertion by the petitioner that the agreement was written at Sahiwal, was not substantiated before the learned Judge. It would be appropriate to reproduce the determination of the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, where he was respondent, those are as under:--- "Learned counsel for the respondent on the other hand submitted that agreement was written at Sahiwal and Civil Court at Sahiwal had the jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the matter. He however was unable to give any proof of the fact that the contract was arrived at Sahiwal. Non-judicial stamp paper appears to have been purchased from Kamoke, District Gujranwala which supports the contention of the petitioner. As the cause of action, prima facie and tentatively speaking, has arisen at Kamoke District Gujranwala, I am inclined to allow the petition."
3. Learned counsel for the "petitioner failed to point out any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order warranting interference.
' For what has been stated above, the instant petition being devoid of any force is hereby dismissed. Leave to appeal is declined.