A. VIII, R10 Return of Defendant, filed a petition before the High Court under O VIII, R10, CPC that one of the contractor's contract of incorporation was executed on the spot and his It was agreed under a clause. That the court should have exclusive jurisdiction over the place, therefore, on the basis of such agreement the case was bound to be dismissed / returned, the plaintiff applied on the request that all money transaction / payment be made by the plaintiff in place. Was done on K and the reasons for the action were settled at the place `K where the defendant's head office was located, therefore, the court K had the authority to proceed on the matter which was the present situation, there were two different agreements. , The plaintiff should have filed two separate cases for two different reasons for the action and the reasons for the proceedings, and no joint trial was possible for this agreement nor to have exclusive jurisdiction to recover the amount. Should have been filed in a competent court having territorial jurisdiction in a competent court for `s different units And because of the different services agreements, the suit can proceed to the location of the different nature of the case and the plaintiff sued. Returns to the plaintiff on the basis of agreement with the exclusive jurisdiction clause and instructs the plaintiff to remove the amended filings and delete the matter and deal with the exclusive jurisdiction, within two weeks. Requested to amend related claim clause.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011
