Hermann case and subsquent case laws on jurisdiction are misinterpreted by both complainant and accused.
1) Where cheque was bounced since you got intimation from your bank while the accused bank is different.As per Hermann case cause of action will also arise at the bank of accused where cheque was bounced.
2) Another imortant matter is issure of notice., as per HERMANN case section b) and c) together will give jurisdiction and not one.
HIGHER COURT CITATIONS.
1) People get misguided by particular words or sentences in higher court citation and feel than like a computer or math problem it should be applicable to all. IT DOES NOT HAPPEN.
2) Most important is that if a point is not raised in lower court or not denied specifically it is presumed to be admission and at higher courts it can not be reopened.
3) So such citations will not be applicable in all cases and particularly in those cases where matter is thoroughly agitated in lower court.