Aligarh Muslim Univiersity Enterprises (P)
Vs. Vinay Engineering Entreprises (P)  INSC 388 (27 September 1993)
A.M. (J) Ahmadi, A.M. (J) Punchhi, M.M. Venkatachala N. (J)
1994 SCC (4) 710
Special leave granted.
are surprised, not a little, that the High Court of Calcutta should have
exercised jurisdiction in a case where it had absolutely no jurisdiction. The
contracts in question were executed at Aligarh, the construction work was to be carried out at Aligarh,, even the contracts provided that
in the event of dispute the Aligarh Court
alone will have jurisdiction. The arbitrator was from Aligarh and was to function there. Merely
because the respondent was a Calcutta-based firm, the High Court of Calcutta
seems to have exercised jurisdiction where it had none by adopting a queer line
of reasoning. We are constrained to say that this is a case of abuse of
Jurisdiction and we feel that the respondent deliberately moved the Calcutta
High Court ignoring the fact that no part of the cause of action had arisen
within the jurisdiction of that Court. It clearly shows that the litigation
filed in the Calcutta High Court was thoroughly unsustainable.
the result we allow these appeals, set aside the impugned orders of the High
Court and direct that the proceedings initiated in the High Court of Calcutta
shall be returned to the respondent for presentation in proper court.
hearing cost is quantified at Rs 10,000 which Respondent 1 Vinay Engineering will
pay, in any case before the application is presented to the Aligarh Court.