1. A contract was awarded to the appellant by the Faisalabad Development Authority for supply of 300 Motor Cycles at the rate of Rs.7,800 per Motor Cycle. This contract was revoked two days later on 30-3-1979. The appellant brought a suit for recovery of Rs.4,50,000 as damages from the Faisalabad Development Authority. Mr. Shaukat Ali Khan, learned Civil Judge Ist Class, Lahore decided to return the plaint to the appellant on the ground that the Courts at Faisalabad alone had the territorial jurisdiction. The appellant has challenged the order of 4-2-1984 in the present appeal.
2. The learned counsel has referred to the case of Messrs Husain Bros. v. Punjab Vegetable and General Mills Co. And another PLD 1961 Kar. 14 and to the case of Dhanraj Mills Ltd. Liability Co. v.
3. Narsing Parsad Boobna etc. AIR 1949 Patna 270 in support of his contention that the rescission of a contract is part of cause of action and since revocation of the contract was communicated to the appellant at Lahore, the Court at Lahore had the jurisdiction.
4. 2.It is not denied that the revocation of the contract was communicated to the appellant at Lahore.
5. In view of the cases referred A to, it is evident that the Court at Lahore have the jurisdiction. The appeal is, therefore, allowed. The order of 4-2-1984 is set aside. B No order as to costs. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.