C.R. No. 5270 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 5270 of 2007 Date of Decision: 30.09.2010 Atma Tube Products Limited .... Petitioner Versus M/s. Hero Cycles Limited ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present : Mr. V.K. Sachdeva, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Inderjit Sharma, Advocate for the respondent 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) Present petition is filed challenging order dated 27.8.2007 passed by Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Ludhaina. Learned trial Court has observed in the impugned order that defendant can file written statement challenging the territorial jurisdiction of the Ludhiana Court and on the pleading of the defendant issue of the territorial jurisdiction shall be framed and thereafter it would be decided. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment of Single Judge of this Court in the matter of Atma Tube Products Ltd. and another vs. The Tata Iron & Steel Co. C.R. No. 5270 of 2007 2 Ltd., 2000(1) PLR page 53. Learned Single Judge of this Court in the matter of Atma Tube Products Ltd. (supra) in paragraph No. 7 has held as under:- “In view of the position of law, as it is, court should not have insisted upon the defendant filing written statement and take objection as to jurisdiction etc. in the written statement. Instead the court should have decided the defendant's application filed under order 7 rule 10 read with section 151 CPC where through the ouster of the jurisdiction of Chandigarh court was being claimed. So, this revision is allowed. Order dated 11.03.2000 impugned in this revision is set aside and the learned trial court is directed to decide the application moved under order 7 rule 10 read with section 151 CPC and till that application is decided, the defendant shall be under no obligation to file written statement......” In view of the dictum of this Court issue of jurisdiction can be decided before filing the written statement at the very out set on the application of the defendant. Learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondent has no objection if trial Court is directed to decide the question of jurisdiction de novo. In view of the above, impugned order dated 27.8.2007, is set aside. Learned trial Court is directed to decide the question of jurisdiction as challenged by the defendant in the application under C.R. No. 5270 of 2007 3 Order 7 Rule 10 CPC , at the outset without proceeding further with the suit on the basis of material already available on record. Parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on 15.10.2010. Question of jurisdiction shall be decided positively on or before 30.11.2010. (ALOK SINGH) 30.09.2010 JUDGE reena/vkd