2.4 Basis of Competency of Nepalese Courts in Cross-Border Private Disputes and the Limitation

1. The CPC's-competency-faces: the defendant's-presence-in-Nepal (the residence-and-the- business (the ordinary's-basis)); the cause's-Nepal-elements (the contract-made-or-broken (the tort-committed (the property-situated)); the plaintiff's-Nepal-residency-faces (the protective- rules (the consumer-and-the-employee's (the weaker's-home)); the submission's (the foreign- defendant's-appearances (the no-objection's (the jurisdiction's-consent-by-conduct))). 2. The statute's-specific: the family's (the marriage's-Nepal-celebration (the domicile's-faces (the U5's-matrimonial)); the arbitration's (the Act's-own-competency (the agreement's-seat)); the immigration's-review (the writ's-face (the Act's-challenges (the department's-decisions)). 3. The limitation's-faces (the exam's-balance): the exclusive-foreign-situs (the foreign- immovable's-title (the Nepal-court's-refusal-lore)); the treaty's (the NY-award's (the annulment's-place (the LAW5604-U's)); the comity's-practical (the enforcement's-foreign- dependence (the judgment's-reciprocity's-practical)); the judicial-review's-line (the Maria- Victoria-era's-writs (the immigration's-foreign-spouse-faces)). The prescribed cases (cited verbatim; honest notes): Maria Victoria Subhirana Rotrage v. Nepal Immigration Department (2067 B.S.), 52 NKP, D.N. 8505 — the foreign-national's-immigration-review face; Suman Panta v. Immigration Department and Others (2074 B.S.), 59 NKP, D.N. 9921; Adhip Pokhrel v. Home Ministry and the Immigration Department, 079- WO-0198 (note: the Gender-and-Inclusive-Justice syllabus lists an Adhip Pokhrel case with a different citation (NKP 2080, No. 5, D.No. 11097) — possibly the same litigation line; verify from the reports) — the immigration-and-the-status cluster (read each decision for the precise facts- and-holdings).