frankfinn aviation assignment 2020

With Frankfinn courses available at over 52 centres across India, the chance to travel the globe is just a stone's throw away

Frankfinn Certificate Course in

Aviation, hospitality and travel management.

• 2 hours/day
• 5 days/week

Hospitality, Travel & Customer Service

• 3 - 5 days/week

Frankfinn Advance Certificate Course in

Aviation, hospitality , travel & customer service.

• 6 days/week

Hospitality Management

• 3 days/week

Aviation & Hospitality Services

Airport ground services, study smarter with frankfinn institute..

World's No.1 Air Hostess Training Institute.

The World's No.1 and most prestigious Air Hostess Training Institute. Established in 1993 as a premium Air Hostess Training Institute, Frankfinn today is recognized as a pioneer and innovator in air hostess training all over India and abroad. The company offers a wide range of Courses to aspiring students and also provides them with exceptional placement support. Frankfinn has cemented its place as an elite training company in the fields of Aviation Hospitality, Travel Management, and Customer Service.

FRANKFINN IS AN APPROVED TRAINING PARTNER OF NATIONAL SKILL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (NSDC) AND TOURISM & HOSPITALITY SKILL COUNCIL (THSC)

Ms. Zainab Abbas Warsi, an alumna of our Bund Garden Centre, Pune has come closer to her dreams thanks to her determination, enthusiasm and a dash of stubbornness. Hearty congratulations on her placement with Air Arabia as a Cabin Crew.

Zainab Abbas Warsi

Ms. Aishwarya Sahay, an alumna of our Camac Street Centre, Kolkata is on cloud nine as she has achieved her dreams by getting placed as a Cabin Crew at Qatar Airways. We are delighted to see her succeed and wish her an amazing career ahead.

Aishwarya Sahay

Ms. Shruti Ghorpade, an alumna of our Nagpur Centre extends her gratitude towards Frankfinn. We are overjoyed to learn that her hard work has finally paid off as she has been placed with IndiGo as a Cabin Crew.

Shruti Ghorpade

Rashi Rajendra Das, an alumna of our Andheri Centre, Mumbai once dreamt of becoming a cabin crew and now she is all set to claim the sky and fly high towards her dreams with Etihad Airways. Frankfinn wishes her luck, success and power!

Rashi Rajendra Das

Ms. Pragati Surelia, an alumna of Frankfinn Institute Of Airhostess Training shares her journey of studying at the Camac Street Centre, Kolkata and getting placed with Indigo Airlines as a Cabin Crew

Pragati Surelia

Ms. Sheetal Kakda, an alumna of Frankfinn Institute Of Airhostess Training shares her journey of studying at Himayat Nagar Centre, Hyderabad. She is currently working as a Flight Attendant in Singapore Airlines.

Sheetal Kakda

Ms. Sheelu Pandey, an alumna of Frankfinn Institute of Airhostess Training, Rajouri Garden Centre, Delhi got selected in Zoom Air as a Cabin Crew in January'2021 during the pandemic. We wish her a smooth experience on-board. Good Luck & Fly High!

Sheelu Pandey

8 Most Scenic Airports of the World

Most of the airport ratings are usually based on international standards, which include the facilities, runway,...

Airline Route Planning

Route planning is one of the most important decisions for an airline. Forecasting demand, availability of aircr...

Ready to start your career - Frankfinn courses are available across many locations in India

Partner with frankfinn for starting a high potential business .

FRANKFINN GROUP

Corporate office.

Best Building, 'A' Wing, 5th Floor, S.V. Road, Opposite Andheri Railway Station, Andheri(W), Mumbai 400058

REGISTERED OFFICE

201, Suneja Tower - 2, District Centre, Janakpuri, New Delhi-110058

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

• Graduate Course

Investment approx ₹ 75 Lacs – ₹ 1.25 Crores (Depending on Center Size and City)* Minimum investment required ₹1Cr* -->

M/S EXL Careers & Anr. Vs. Frankfinn Aviation Services Pvt. Ltd.

• Post author: LawFoyer
• Post published: 19 July 2021
• Post category: Case Analysis
• Post comments: 0 Comments
• Reading time: 13 mins read

By – Priyanshi Bhatia

In the Supreme Court of India

The case of M/S EXL Careers & Anr. Vs. Frankfinn Aviation Services Pvt. Ltd. dated 5 August 2020, revolved around an extremely crucial question of law regarding the return of plaint in case of incompetent territorial jurisdiction. Referring to previous judgements, the Supreme Court held that under Order 7, Rule 10 &10A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, when a plant is returned and is presented before an appropriate court, the proceeding shall begin as de novo.

INTRODUCTION

The Honourable bench of the Supreme Court incorporating of three judges i.e. Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, Justice Ms Indira Banerjee and Justice Mr Navin Sinha witnessed a civil appeal in the case of M/S EXL Careers and Another Vs. Frankfinn Aviation Services Pvt. Ltd. and ruled that if and when a plant is returned under Order VII Rule 10 & 10A of CPC, 1908, the suit shall proceed afresh and not resume from the point where it was pending previously.

BACKGROUND OF THE CASE

Suits lose their jurisdiction once they are filed in a court for a range of factors. The suit can no longer be presented in a court that is not of appropriate jurisdiction. As a result, the lawsuit must be filed in a competent court. Order 7 Rule Ten and Section 24(5) of the CPC [1]  are the options accessible in this situation. If there exists a problem in the jurisdiction, a Plaint can be transferred to a court of appropriate jurisdiction at any time during the case, as per Order 7 Rule 10. Section 24(5), on the other hand, gives the District Court and the High Court the authority to move any case due to a lack of authority. When these two clauses are juxtaposed, the only thing similar between them is the cause. In addition, there are no guidelines in the CPC that specify which should be used when. A three-judge bench in M/s. EXL Careers and Anr. v Frankfinn Aviation Services Private Ltd. rejected Oriental Insurance Co. v Tejparas Associates and Exports Pvt. Ltd. and Joginder Tuli v, S.L. Bhatia, in M/s. EXL Careers and Anr. v Frankfinn Aviation Services Private Ltd. It was determined in the first case that Rule 10A was adopted only to obviate the requirement to serve the summoning on the respondents after the plaint was brought to a competent jurisdiction. This means that the rule has nothing to do about the previous court’s decision and that the matter must be reopened. In the latter case, the court finds that the court erred by failing to refer to any judgment on the subject.

FACTS OF THE CASE

• The Respondent i.e. Frankfinn Aviation Services Private Limited pressed charges against the petitioner and filed a suit for compensation of money with regard to a Franchise Agreement signed between the two. The case was presented before a civil judge in Gurgaon.
• In return, the appellant demanded for a return of plaint under section 7, Rule 10 of CPC on the basis of the fact that the appellant did not have his residence, nor his business in the mentioned jurisdiction i.e. Gurgaon. However, the request for the return of the plaint was rejected.
•  The Franchise Agreement signed between the two parties also mentioned a clause 16B that revolved around the jurisdiction to settle any dispute. However, the appellant did not object under the clause 16B of the agreement.
• Petitioner then requested a petition before the Delhi High Court. Due to the exclusion clause of 16B, the plaint was returned for wanting territorial jurisdiction with the Gurgaon court.
• Petitioner then filed a revised petition before the Delhi High Court for de novo hearing of the suit, i.e. proceeding of the suit from the beginning and not from where it was previously left. However, the Delhi High court held that “the suit at Delhi shall resume from the stage at where it was pending at the Gurgaon court and not de novo.
• Petitioner then filed a Special Leave Petition before the three bench judge of Supreme Court drawing reference by a Division Bench- opining a discern dispute amongst two Division Bench decisions in the cases of Joginder Tuli vs. S.L. Bhatia and Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. vs. Modern Construction and Co.

The issue presented before the court in the given case was as follows:

If and when a plant is returned under Order VII Rule 10 & 10A of the CPC OF 1908, whether the suit will be proceeded as de novo or will it resume from the stage where it was pending before the court at the time when the plaint was returned?

ARGUMENTS FROM THE PLAINTIFF’S SIDE

• The plaintiff  contended that the Delhi High Court demanded return of the entire case and file because the Gurgaon court had overlapping authority over the case which was almost close to its final hearing and it would be unjustifiable to start the case afresh.
• The plaintiff also quoted the case of Oriental Insurance wherein, Joginder Tuli was relied upon, to differentiate Amar Chand Inani vs. The Union of India. The argument here was that Rule 10A  was subsequently added through an amendment in 1977 and it is unfair to say that under any situation, the return of plaint for hearing before the relevant court must be treated as fresh filing.
• The defendant in his first objection did not raise the ground under the exclusion clause 16B of the agreement but limited it to the grounds that no business was carried in Gurgaon and that he did not reside there also.

ARGUMENTS FROM THE DEFENDANT’S SIDE

• The defendant contended that there was no dispute between the ONGC and Joginder Tuli since the latter decision was given precisely in the facts of the case.
• The defendant argued relying upon a number of previous judgements to demonstrate that a suit must essentially proceed as de novo after the return of a plaint, regardless of the stage where the suit was previously at.
• HC erred- the case wasn’t of exercising transfer jurisdiction u/s 24, CPC.
• Return of plaint can be at any stage(u/O 7, R 10 & 10A)- possibility of conclusion of Evidence & pleadings at Gurgaon Court- inconsequential.

RELATED PROVISIONS

• Order VII Rule 10- Return of Plaint

Under Order 7 Rule of 10 of CPC, 1908, when a plant is returned due to problems related to the jurisdiction, the suit will not resume from where it was left off and shall proceed as de novo i.e., if there is a lack of jurisdiction, the suit shall be filed as a new suit in the appropriate court and the hearing shall start afresh.

Later, Rule 10A and 10B were further added to Order VII through the Civil Procedure Amendment Act, 1976. Rule 10A authorizes the court to determine a date for the presentation of the suit before the court of appropriate jurisdiction.

• Section 24(5)- Transfer of Suit

The Civil Procedure Amendment Act, 1976 also added clause (5) in Section 24. Under Section 24(5), a lawsuit can be handed over from a court that does not have competent jurisdiction. The High Court and the District Court have the authority to hand over a suit from a court that lacks territorial jurisdiction to a court with appropriate jurisdiction.

• It is more res integera that in a dispute between parties where two or more courts may have jurisdiction, it is always open for them by agreement to confer exclusive jurisdiction by consent on one of the two court. In the present case Clause 16B of the agreement conferred exclusive jurisdiction on court at Delhi.
• In the case of Joginder Tuli:
• The observations are very clear that the Suit has to proceed afresh before the proper Court.
•  The direction came to be made more in the peculiar facts of the case in exercise of the discretionary jurisdiction u/a 136 of the Constitution.
•  Also, it does not take into consideration any earlier precedents. There is no discussion of the law either and therefore it has no presidential value as laying down any law.
• Modern construction Case:
• It refers to the consistent position in law, it took into consideration relevant precedents, including the case of Joginder Tuli,
•  It arrived at the conclusion the following conclusion: “(…) if the court where the suit is presented, is of the opinion that it does not have appropriate jurisdiction, the plaint will be returned in regard with the provisions of Order 7 Rule 10 CPC (…) after presenting the suit before the court of appropriate jurisdiction, the plaint will be regarded as new and the trial will be proceeded as  de novo even if the hearing had come to a conclusion in the court that did not have competent territorial jurisdiction.”
• The Court found no discrepancy in the law as stated in Modern Construction and Joginder Tuli. Modern Construction (supra) laid down the accurate law.
• It was held that:

transfer of a suit u/s 24, CPC was entirely different from a return of plaint. In transfer, both the transferor and the transferee court have jurisdiction to hear the matter. The transferee court has the discretion to either try the proceedings again or resume from the point at which such proceeding contrast to the scheme under Order VII Rule 10 read with Rule 10-A where no such choice is offered and the suit has to initiate as de novo.

• In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, because the petitioner did not raise the objection under clause 16B of the agreement [exclusion of jurisdiction at Gurgaon Court] at the very first opportunity, the first order of rejection attained finality.
• The objection was raised as an afterthought, the second application under Order      VII Rule 10 had to be preferred by the respondent, that pleadings of the parties have been completed, evidence led, and that the matter was fixed for final argument, the Court held that:
• it was of the considered opinion that despite having concluded that the impugned order is not sustainable in view of the law laid down in the Modern Construction
•  in exercise of its discretionary jurisdiction u/a 136 of the Constitution and in order to do complete and substantial justice between the parties u/a 142 of the Constitution, in the peculiar facts and situations of the case, the Court declined to set aside the impugned order of the High Court date.

A pertinent question of law: “when a suit is restored due to lack of territorial jurisdiction, will the proceeding start as de novo or continue from the point it was left before?” was made to the Honourable Supreme Court which was further transferred to an Upper Bench to come to a conclusion. The Honourable Bench very carefully analysed the question of law by referring to previous judgements and held that the proceeding shall commence as de novo.

You Might Also Like

Indian express newspapers v. union of india, (1985) 1 scc 641, vikram singh @ vicky and anr. v. union of india and ors., m/s magma fincorp ltd. v. rajesh kumar tiwari, leave a reply cancel reply.

• Journal Website
• Call For Papers
• Volume 1 Issue 2
• Submit Assignment
• Join our team
• Write for us
• Case Analysis
• Legal Drafts
• 20th Edition Harvard Blue Book
• Submit Event
• Quiz Competitions
• Call for Papers
• Courses & Workshops
• Essay Competitions
• MUNs, Youth Parliament & Other Competitions
• Apply For Internship
• Internship Reviews
• Verify Internship Certificate
• About LawFoyer

EXL Careers v. Frankfinn Aviation Services (P) Ltd.(2020) 12 SCC 667

• Defendant Frankfinn Aviation Services charges the applicant with compensation for work. There was Franchise agreement signed between the two. The case is being re-assigned to another judge in Gurgaon.  
• In return, the plaintiff wants a refund of the claim under section 7, that he does not live in Gurgaon. However, the refund request was denied.  
• The franchise agreement was signed between the two parties under clause 16 B. However, the appointment of directors is an important part of the agreement.  
• The appellant then filed a review before the Delhi High Court to hear the De novo claim, to proceed with the case from the beginning and not where it had been left earlier. However, the Delhi High Court held the case.  
• The applicant then applied for special leave before the bench of 3 judges in the High Court receiving a reference to the decision between the section bench decisions in the case of Joginder Tuli against SL Bhatia and oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited. In contrast to modern construction and Co.

Law Article in India

Please drop your comments, you may like.

An Analysis On Corporate Re...

Animal Rights in India: The...

Legal Terrorism: Dowry Mena...

Electoral Bond And Politica...

Court Procedures For Guardi...

Admissibility Of Accomplice...

Legal question & answers, lawyers in india - search by city.

Law Articles

How to file for mutual divorce in delhi.

How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi Mutual Consent Divorce is the Simplest Way to Obtain a D...

Increased Age For Girls Marriage

It is hoped that the Prohibition of Child Marriage (Amendment) Bill, 2021, which intends to inc...

Facade of Social Media

One may very easily get absorbed in the lives of others as one scrolls through a Facebook news ...

Section 482 CrPc - Quashing Of FIR: Guid...

The Inherent power under Section 482 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (37th Chapter of t...

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in India: A...

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is a concept that proposes the unification of personal laws across...

Role Of Artificial Intelligence In Legal...

Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing various sectors of the economy, and the legal i...

File caveat In Supreme Court Instantly

First refuelling for Russia’s Akademik Lomonosov floating NPP

!{Model.Description}

The FNPP includes two KLT-40S reactor units. In such reactors, nuclear fuel is not replaced in the same way as in standard NPPs – partial replacement of fuel once every 12-18 months. Instead, once every few years the entire reactor core is replaced with and a full load of fresh fuel.

The KLT-40S reactor cores have a number of advantages compared with standard NPPs. For the first time, a cassette core was used, which made it possible to increase the fuel cycle to 3-3.5 years before refuelling, and also reduce by one and a half times the fuel component in the cost of the electricity produced. The operating experience of the FNPP provided the basis for the design of the new series of nuclear icebreaker reactors (series 22220). Currently, three such icebreakers have been launched.

The Akademik Lomonosov was connected to the power grid in December 2019, and put into commercial operation in May 2020.

Electricity generation from the FNPP at the end of 2023 amounted to 194 GWh. The population of Pevek is just over 4,000 people. However, the plant can potentially provide electricity to a city with a population of up to 100,000. The FNPP solved two problems. Firstly, it replaced the retiring capacities of the Bilibino Nuclear Power Plant, which has been operating since 1974, as well as the Chaunskaya Thermal Power Plant, which is more than 70 years old. It also supplies power to the main mining enterprises located in western Chukotka. In September, a 490 km 110 kilovolt power transmission line was put into operation connecting Pevek and Bilibino.

Image courtesy of TVEL

• Terms and conditions
• Privacy Policy
• Newsletter sign up
• Digital Edition
• Editorial Standards

Air Show Report : MAKS 2005 Moscow International Aviation & Space Salon

Report and photos by Andrew Philpott ( view portfolio )

Home | Aircraft | Air Forces | Air Shows | Specials | Wallpapers | News | Quiz | Forum

Contact | About | FAQ | Updates | RSS Feeds | Links | Search

Copyright © 2002-2024 Niels Hillebrand . All Rights Reserved | Privacy & Cookie Policy | Terms of Service

• Air Transport
• Defense and Space
• Business Aviation
• Aircraft & Propulsion
• Connected Aerospace
• Emerging Technologies
• Manufacturing & Supply Chain
• Advanced Air Mobility
• Commercial Space
• Sustainability
• Interiors & Connectivity
• Airports & Networks
• Airlines & Lessors
• Safety, Ops & Regulation
• Maintenance & Training
• Supply Chain
• Workforce & Training
• Sensors & Electronic Warfare
• Missile Defense & Weapons
• Budget, Policy & Operations
• Airports, FBOs & Suppliers
• Flight Deck
• Marketplace
• Advertising
• Marketing Services
• Fleet, Data & APIs
• Research & Consulting
• Network and Route Planning

Market Sector

• AWIN - Premium
• AWIN - Aerospace and Defense
• AWIN - Business Aviation
• AWIN - Commercial Aviation
• Advanced Air Mobility Report - NEW!
• Aerospace Daily & Defense Report
• Aviation Daily
• The Weekly of Business Aviation
• Air Charter Guide
• Aviation Week Marketplace
• Route Exchange
• The Engine Yearbook
• Aircraft Bluebook
• Airportdata.com
• Airport Strategy and Marketing (ASM)
• CAPA – Centre for Aviation
• Fleet Discovery Civil
• Fleet Discovery Military
• Fleet & MRO Forecast
• MRO Prospector
• Air Transport World
• Aviation Week & Space Technology
• Aviation Week & Space Technology - Inside MRO
• Business & Commercial Aviation
• CAPA - Airline Leader
• Routes magazine
• Downloadable Reports
• Recent webinars
• MRO Americas
• MRO Australasia
• MRO Baltics & Eastern Europe Region
• MRO Latin America
• MRO Middle East
• Military Aviation Logistics and Maintenance Symposium (MALMS)
• Asia Aerospace Leadership Forum & MRO Asia-Pacific Awards
• A&D Mergers and Acquisitions
• A&D Programs
• A&D Manufacturing
• A&D Raw Materials
• A&D SupplyChain
• A&D SupplyChain Europe
• Aero-Engines Americas
• Aero-Engines Europe
• Aero-Engines Asia-Pacific
• Digital Transformation Summit
• Engine Leasing Trading & Finance Europe
• Engine Leasing, Trading & Finance Americas
• Routes Americas
• Routes Europe
• Routes World
• CAPA Airline Leader Summit - Airlines in Transition
• CAPA Airline Leader Summit - Americas
• CAPA Airline Leader Summit - Latin America & Caribbean
• CAPA Airline Leader Summit - Australia Pacific
• CAPA Airline Leader Summit - Asia & Sustainability Awards
• CAPA Airline Leader Summit - World & Awards for Excellence
• GAD Americas
• A&D Mergers and Acquisitions Conference (ADMA)
• A&D Manufacturing Conference
• Aerospace Raw Materials & Manufacturers Supply Chain Conference (RMC)
• Aviation Week 20 Twenties
• Aviation Week Laureate Awards
• ATW Airline Awards
• Program Excellence Awards and Banquet
• CAPA Asia Aviation Summit & Awards for Excellence
• Content and Data Team
• Aviation Week & Space Technology 100-Year
• Subscriber Services
• Advertising, Marketing Services & List Rentals
• Content Sales
• PR & Communications
• Content Licensing and Reprints
• AWIN Access

Jet Aviation Moscow Vnukovo Earns FAA Repair Station Approval

Subscription required.

This content requires a subscription to one of the Aviation Week Intelligence Network (AWIN) bundles.

Schedule a demo today to find out how you can access this content and similar content related to your area of the global aviation industry.

Already an AWIN subscriber? Login

Did you know?  Aviation Week has won top honors multiple times in the Jesse H. Neal National Business Journalism Awards, the business-to-business media equivalent of the Pulitzer Prizes.

Related Content