Kanappa Chetty vs Saibo and Co. – clr volume 2 page 037

Brief
In Kanappa Chetty v. Saibo and Co., the court addressed whether the District Court of Kandy possessed jurisdiction over defendants who conducted business but did not reside within the district, and whether defendants could be allowed to defend an action brought on two promissory notes. It was held that mere business operations within a district, absent residency, did not satisfy the requirements of section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code for conferring jurisdiction. The principle reaffirmed was that residence, not solely the carrying on of business, determines jurisdictional competence under the Code. This determination relied on statutory provisions governing civil procedure and precedent emphasizing the distinction between residence and business activity as a jurisdictional basis. Th