Oral Order:

1. This Petition seeks leave under Clause XII of the Letters Patent Act, 1865.

2. When the matter is called out, Ms. Sethna, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that in fact leave under Clause XII of the Letters Patent is not required as it has been pleaded in paragraph 63 of the Plaint that the entire cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court and the Suit property is also situate within the jurisdiction of this Court.

3. Ms. Sethna has submitted that since the Registry has raised an objection with respect to the leave under Clause XII of the Letters Patent and therefore, this Petition has been filed.

4. Ms. Sethna further submits that the Suit is for declaration and for specific performance of the Agreement for sale of land / property situate within the jurisdiction of this Court and for other reliefs and is a Suit for land and therefore, merely because the registered office of the Defendant No.1 is in Thane, outside the jurisdiction of this Court, the Registry in view of the provisions of the Clause XII of the Letters Patent ought not to have raised the objection.

5. Ms. Sethna has very carefully taken this Court through the wordings of Clause XII of the Letters Patent and submits that since the criteria of the Suit property or land having been situate within the jurisdiction of this Court or even the entire cause of action having arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court, having been met, it would not be necessary to refer to the language which is in the alternative that the Defendant at the time of the commencement of the Suit dwells or carries on business or personally works for gain within the limits of the ordinary original jurisdiction of the Court, which would apply only if part of cause of action had arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court.

6. Ms. Sethna has tendered across the bar a decision in the case of D. G. Kotak and another Vs. Rajeshkumar @ Rajas R. Doshi and others(2012(3) Mh. L. J.), submitting that it has been clearly observed in paragraph 5 of the said decision that Clause XII of the Letters Patent is divided into two parts. The first part relates to the Suits relating to land or immovable property and the second part relates to all other cases i.e. Suits other than the Suits for land and other immovable properties. Ms. Sethna submits that since the present Suit inter alia seeks specific performance of an agreement for sale of immovable property situate within the jurisdiction of this Court, the Suit would be a suit for land viz. within the local limits of this Court’s ordinary original civil jurisdiction, as stated in paragraph 63 of the Plaint and in view of paragraph 7 of the decision in the case of D. G. Kotak and another Vs. Rajeshkumar @ Rajas R. Doshi and others (supra), where it has been observed that a Suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale of an immovable property, in which the possession of the property is claimed in pursuance of the said agreement, would be a Suit for land, no leave is required as the Suit is for declaration and for specific performance of the said agreement for sale etc.

7. Coming back to paragraph 5 of the said decision in the case of D. G. Kotak and another Vs. Rajeshkumar @ Rajas R. Doshi and others (supra), learned Counsel submits that if the Suit is not relating to the land or immovable property, which is not the fact situation in this case, then the High Court will have jurisdiction to entertain the Suit if (a) the cause of action has wholly arisen within the local limits of its ordinary original jurisdiction or (b) if prior leave of the Court has been obtained and cause of action has arisen in part within the local limits of the ordinary original jurisdiction of the High Court or (c) if prior leave of the Court is obtained and the Defendant dwells or carries on business or personally works for gain within such limits.

8. Ms. Sethna submits that since the scenarios as submitted above are all exclusive and in the alternative and the Suit property is situate within the jurisdiction of this Court and the Suit is a suit for land, no leave for leave under Clause XII of the Letters Patent is necessary.

9. I have heard the learned Counsel and considered the submissions.

10. I agree with Ms. Sethna, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner. It is clear that in a Suit for land or immovable property where the Suit land or the immovable property is situate within the local limits of the ordinary original jurisdiction of this Court or in cases other than Suit for land where the entire cause of action has arisen within the local limits of the ordinary original jurisdiction of this Court or the Defendant dwells or carries on business or personally works for gain within such limits, no leave under Clause XII of the Letters Patent is required. It is only when part of cause of action has arisen within the local limits of the ordinary original jurisdiction of this Court that this Court can receive, try and determine the Suit only after prior leave under Clause XII of the Letters Patent is obtained.

11. Paragraph 63 of the Plaint clearly avers that the Suit property is situate within the jurisdiction of this Court and also that the entire cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court. It would, therefore, not make any difference if the Defendant No. 1 has its registered office outside the jurisdiction of this Court.

12. The scenarios envisaged under Clause XII of the Letters Patent are all exclusive and in the alternative and once conditions of one of the scenarios are met it would not be necessary to fulfill the conditions of the other situations.

13. In view of the aforesaid discussion, no orders need to be passed on the Leave Petition as no leave under Clause XII of the Letters Patent is necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case.

14. The said objection with respect to leave under Clause XII of the Letters Patent Act is dispensed with and the Registry is directed to proceed with the numbering the Suit, subject to any other objections.

15. The Petition to accordingly stand disposed.