IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN MONDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2009 / 15TH ASHADHA 1931 FAO.No. 177 of 2007() --------------------- OS.692/2005 of I ADDL.SUB COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF: ---------------------------------- M/S.ULTRA TECH CEMENT LTD., 8TH FLOOR, K.G.OXFORD BUSSINESS CENTRE, SREEKANDATH ROAD, RAVIPURAM, KOCHI-16, NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR OFFICER MR.SANKARSHAN NAYAK, S/O. LATE SHRI KRISHNA CHANDRA NAYAK, AGED 29 YEARS. BY ADV. SRI.A.KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): DEFENDANT: ------------------------------------------- ANDREWS, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O.APREM MATHEN PROPRIETOR, M/S.KRUPA ENTERPRISES, HOSPITAL JUNCTION, THOTTAKKAD P.O., KOTTAYAM, KERALA 686539. ADV. SRI.JAMES KURIAN SRI.SANTHOSH MODAYIL THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - F.A.O. No. 177 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of July, 2009. JUDGMENT Raman, J, Appeal arises out of the order passed by the court below where, the court while considering the question regarding jurisdiction as a preliminary issue, held that the court has no jurisdiction. Appellant is the plaintiff. The suit is for money. The defendant was appointed as a stockist. It is not in dispute that the agreement between the parties was arrived at, at Bombay. The court below found that the Ernakulam court has no jurisdiction, mainly stating that no part of the cause of action is seen to have arisen within the jurisdictional limit of Ernakulam court based on the materials produced. But what are the materials produced, there is no discussion regarding the same. There is no index showing the records produced. If there are documentary materials produced, the court has to record it for the purpose of entering a finding on the issue and after hearing the parties refer to those materials and then decide the issue regarding jurisdiction, then only this court FAO.177/2007. 2 will be in a position to see whether the materials produced, and referred to in the order are sufficient to hold this way or the other. In the absence of any such material, we set aside the order and send back the case to the court below for further consideration in accordance with law and after hearing the parties and after marking the documentary evidence produced in the case. The appeal is allowed as above. The parties shall appear before the court below on 3.8.2009. P.R. Raman, Judge P. Bhavadasan, Judge sb.