Directlink India (P) Limited (“Directlink”) sued US Professionals, LLC (“US Professionals”) for money owed on a commercial contract account. US Professionals filed a timely answer that raised the defense of improper venue and simultaneously moved to dismiss the complaint based upon improper venue. After these pleadings were filed, the trial court approved the withdrawal request of US Professionals’ counsel. Before withdrawing, US Professionals’ counsel pro*680vided the trial court with an address and telephone number for US Professionals in Memphis, Tennessee.
Decided January 24, 2001.
Olim & Loeb, Jay E. Loeb, for appellant.
Subsequently, the trial court notified US Professionals by mail that the case was set for a nonjury trial on June 8, 2000. When US Professionals failed to appear for trial, the trial court entered a judgment against it in the amount of $66,579.31 and dismissed its counterclaim. The trial court’s written order and judgment makes no mention of any ruling on US Professionals’ motion to dismiss based upon improper venue.1 US Professionals appeals, asserting the trial court erred by entering a judgment against it without first ruling on the motion to dismiss and that it also erred in its calculation and award of damages to Directlink.
1. Because the record does not show that the trial court ruled on or otherwise disposed of US Professionals’ timely motion to dismiss for improper venue,2 and it would be error for the trial court to enter a judgment against US Professionals without having done so, we must vacate the trial court’s order and judgment and remand this case to the trial court for proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. See Morgan v. Berry, 152 Ga. App. 623, 624 (263 SE2d 508) (1979) (properly raised venue defense “not waived by the fact that the case was allowed to go to default judgment”); Williams v. Willis, 204 Ga. App. 328, 330 (419 SE2d 139) (1992) (trial court erred by ruling on motion for summary judgment before ruling on properly raised motion to transfer based upon improper venue).
2. Our holding in Division 1 of this opinion renders appellant’s remaining enumerations of error moot.
Judgment vacated and case remanded with direction.
Blackburn, C. J., and Eldridge, J., concur.
*681Lackland, & Heyward, Theodore H. Lackland, Kyle S. Kotake, for appellees.