Unilateral Affirmation By One Party, Without Being Specifically Accepted By Other Party Doesn't Confer Exclusive Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court
1 year, 2 months ago

Unilateral Affirmation By One Party, Without Being Specifically Accepted By Other Party Doesn't Confer Exclusive Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court

Live Law  

In a significant judgment, the Kerala High Court held that a unilateral affirmation by a party to a contract, without being specifically accepted by the other party, doesn't confer exclusive jurisdiction, since the ouster of jurisdiction of courts cannot be lightly assumed or presumed.The Single Judge Bench of Justice V.G. In a significant judgment, the Kerala High Court held that a unilateral affirmation by a party to a contract, without being specifically accepted by the other party, doesn't confer exclusive jurisdiction, since the ouster of jurisdiction of courts cannot be lightly assumed or presumed. It was thus contended by the defendants in the present revision petition that since the parties had agreed to confer exclusive jurisdiction on the courts situated in the places mentioned in the purchase order, the court below grossly erred in relying on the printed words in the letter to hold that the court at Ernakulam had jurisdiction. Relying on the decision in Unneerikutty, while holding that the words printed at the bottom of the letterhead with respect to jurisdiction could not be treated as a special contract conferring exclusive jurisdiction on the court mentioned therein, the Court in this case went on to hold that the printed words 'subject to Cochin jurisdiction' does not confer exclusive jurisdiction on the courts at Cochin.

Contract Jurisdiction Court Parties Party Kerala High Court Courts Revision Ernakulam Ker Exclusive Accepted Clause Cochin Exclusive Jurisdiction Confer Unilateral Affirmation Confer Exclusive Jurisdiction Other Party Cochin Jurisdiction  specifically  revision  contract  party  high  exclusive  court  confer  unilateral  clause  kerala  parties  courts  doesnt  accepted  jurisdiction

History of this topic

'Arbitrator Can Only Decide On Point Which Is Referred To Tribunal, Not Entire Dispute': Kerala High Court
1 month, 3 weeks ago

'Arbitrator Can Only Decide On Point Which Is Referred To Tribunal, Not Entire Dispute': Kerala High Court

Live Law  

The Kerala High Court Bench of Justice Dr A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Easwaran S. held that if the parties choose to refer to a singular point for arbitration, then the arbitral tribunal cannot proceed to decide on all disputes. On the contrary, if the parties agree to arbitrate on the entire disputes, then the arbitral tribunal shall have …

Amendments Not Required For Adjudication Of Real Issues Between Parties Ought Not To Be Allowed: Kerala High Court
1 year, 3 months ago

Amendments Not Required For Adjudication Of Real Issues Between Parties Ought Not To Be Allowed: Kerala High Court

Live Law  

The Kerala High Court recently set aside an order of the Magistrate Court allowing respondent's application in the suit to amend their pleadings stating that amendments, that are not required for adjudicating the real dispute between the parties and are outside the scope of the reliefs sought in the suit, ought not to be allowed. Moreover, the amendment sought for …

Jurisdiction To Be Tried As Preliminary Issue If Raised, Finding At Final Stage Will Cause Undue Hardship To Parties: Kerala High Court
2 years, 9 months ago

Jurisdiction To Be Tried As Preliminary Issue If Raised, Finding At Final Stage Will Cause Undue Hardship To Parties: Kerala High Court

Live Law  

The Kerala High Court has recently held that where a defendant raises the question of jurisdiction and an issue is framed in the suit regarding jurisdiction, for the convenience of the parties, the same should be tried as a preliminary issue.Justice A. Badharudeen added that the finding regarding jurisdiction at the final stage would only cause undue hardship to the …

Discover Related