Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908) --.-- --.-- S. 24 --.-- Rendition of accounts --.-- Exclusive jurisdiction of Civil Court --.-- Contract --.-- Company was situated at Lahore --.-- No regional office at Multan --.-- Being an agent has sued petitioner as principal for rendition of accounts --.-- Validity --.-- Respondent's suit, therefore, appears to be hit by rule of law that a principal cannot be ordered to render accounts to an agent unless liability to account as established --.-- Question which requires determination is as to whether respondent's suit should be transferred to Lahore purely on basis of ground that Civil Courts at Multan do not have jurisdiction in matter --.-- Neither of parties have taken stance that Civil Courts at Multan and Lahore have concurrent jurisdiction in matter --.-- On basis of settled principle of law that an application for transfer of a suit under Section 24 of CPC is only competent if trial Court before whom suit is instituted/filed is competent to try it --.-- It is further settled law that, competency for such purpose includes not only pecuniary competency but also territorial competency --.-- Territorial jurisdiction of trial Court before whom suit, sought to be transferred, is pending has to be determined before suit is transferred, as suit under Section 24 of CPC can only be transferred from a Court competent to try it. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908) --.-- --.-- Ss. 9 & 20 --.-- Contract Act, 1872, S. 28 --.-- Suit for rendition of account --.-- Territorial jurisdiction --.-- Contract --.-- It is a settled proposition of law that Civil Courts exercise their jurisdiction under provisions of CPC --.-- If a Civil Court does not possess such jurisdiction under CPC then it cannot be conferred upon it through mutual agreement between parties to a dispute --.-- Where two or more Courts have jurisdiction to try a suit under CPC then an agreement between parties to dispute to effect that only one of such Courts shall try such a dispute cannot be considered contrary to public policy as agreement would not violate provisions of Section 28 of Contract Act, 1872, nor provisions of Sections 9 and 20 of CPC. [P. 490]…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492