Judgment B.N.Agrawal, J. 1. Heard the parties. 2. This application has been filed against the impugned order, by which the court below has rejected the objection filed on behalf of the defendant that Aurangabed court had no jurisdiction to try the suit. 3. This plaintiff, who is resident of Aurangabad filed a money suit for realisation of a sum of Rs. 33,290 on account of suffering loss by an accident from a vehicle, which was insured with the defendant Insurance Company. The accident had taken place within Dhanbad District, The head office of the Insurance Company is at Calcutta and its branch office is at Gaya. There is nothing to show that the Insurance Company is having any branch at Aurangabad. After creation of the district of Aurangabad the present suit was transferred to Aurangabad Court as the plaintiff was resident of Auranagabad. In the impugned order the trial court has not considered the question as to whether any part of cause of action has accrued within the jurisdiction of Aurangabad court. In the suit of the present nature if question of jurisdiction is raised, court has to see whether the defendant is residing within the district of the court concerned. In the present case the defendant is not-residing within the District of Aurangabad. For deciding this question the court has to further see that either whole of the cause of action or any part of the cause of action has accrued within the jurisdiction of the court concerned and only then the suit will be maintainable. This question has not been considered by the trial court. 4. learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiff submitted that plaint shows that part of the cause of action has accrued within the jurisdiction of the Aurangabad court; whereas learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the defendant has disputed this fact. In my view, this question, should be decided afresh by the trial court. I am told that both the parties have led evidence on merit of the suit. In view of this I, direct the trial court to frame an issue whether Aurangabad court has territorial jurisdiction over the present suit. On this issue he will give opportunity to both the parties to lead evidence. I am told that both the parties have led evidence on merit of the suit. In view of this I, direct the trial court to frame an issue whether Aurangabad court has territorial jurisdiction over the present suit. On this issue he will give opportunity to both the parties to lead evidence. This issue shall be also decided along with the other issues in the suit at the time of final judgment, as on merit of the suit parties have led evidence. 5. In the result, this application is allowed, impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the trial court to dispose of the suit in accordance with the aforesaid direction. 6. Since the suit was fild in the year, 1972,I direct the trial court to dispose of the same within the period of six months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. 7. In the circumstances of the case, I direct that the parties shall bear their own costs.