SC Lays Down The Test To Establish If Cause Of Action Has Arisen In The Jurisdiction Of A Particular HC

The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices S. Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta recently gave a test to check if a cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of a particular High Court.

In the matter at hand a writ petition was filed challenging the notification of Goa Government under the GST Act and the appellant submitted before the court that a notification issued under a statute enacted by a state legislature cannot be subjected to judicial scrutiny within the jurisdiction of a high court of a different state, more so when no cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of that high court.

The appellant further put forth that since no part of cause of action for invocation of the writ jurisdiction has arisen in that high court , those petitions should not proceed against the appellant. The appellant also put forth that notification issued by the Goa government was challenged before the Sikkim High court and the high court heard the challenge. But an appeal was filed by the State of Goa citing that the Sikkim high court did not have the jurisdiction to hear such a challenge.

It was urged by the appellant before the court that to avoid any conflict of opinions, the writ petitioners could either independently challenge the notification before the High Court of Bombay at Goa or apply for intervention.

The High court of Bombay had filed the application for its deletion from the respondents but that was not allowed by the High Court of Sikkim. It has also been put forth by the petitioner that part of the cause of action has arisen in Sikkim and that’s how Sikkim high court has the jurisdiction.

The supreme court however noted that only because the petitioners and the respondents are present in the territorial jurisdiction of the Sikkim High Court, it has been submitted that the cause of action has partly arisen in Sikkim. 

The Supreme Court bench relied on the case Kusum Ingots v. UoI and observed that even if a small cause of action arises within the territorial jurisdiction of a high court, the same by itself could nit have been a determinative factor compelling the high court to keep the writ petitions alive against the appellant to decide the matter qua the impugned notification, on merit.The apex court observed that the Sikkim high court has hence erred in the decision of dismissing the applications of the High Court of Bombay.

Test To Check If The Cause Of Action Arises In A Particular High Court:

The court moved deeper into the meaning of cause of action and said that it is the material facts which are important for pleading by the writ petitioner and for obtaining relief but the high court ought not top have jurisdiction simply because the part of cause of action has been assumed to have arisen in the State of Sikkim.

Observation:

The Supreme court stated that the appellant will stand deleted from the array of respondents. The court further directed that the interim order staying the proceedings before the high court stands vacated with the result that the high court may proceed to decide the writ petitions against the other respondents according to law.

CASE: STATE OF GOA V. SUMMIT ONLINE TRADE SOLUTIONS (P) LTD AND ORS.

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1700/2023