Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Aanchal Mittal Vs Ankur Shukla (Delhi High Court)
Appeal Number : CM(M) 1086/2021 & CM No. 42689/2021(for stay) 25/02/2022
Date of Judgement/Order :
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Aanchal Mittal Vs Ankur Shukla (Delhi High Court)

High Court held that a jurisdiction cannot be vested on a Court by agreement of the parties if that Court inherently lacks jurisdiction.

 It is evident from the facts of the present case that there is no principal or subordinate office of the LLP in the State of Delhi and neither are the books of accounts kept in Delhi, therefore, there is no cause of action in respect of the present suit, which is arising within the territorial limits of the Courts in Delhi. Furthermore, the parties by agreement cannot give jurisdiction to a Court, which otherwise does not have such jurisdiction. Thus, I am of the considered view that the Courts in Delhi lack the territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the present suit.

However, I may also note that I do not agree with the submission made on behalf of the petitioners/defendants that the jurisdiction with regard to the present suit would vest exclusively with the NCLT. In my view, the disputes raised in the present suit do not pertain to Sections 60, 61, 62 and 63 of the LLP Act in respect of which jurisdiction has been vested with the NCLT. Sections 60, 61 and 62 of Chapter XII of the LLP Act pertain to compromise, arrangement or reconstruction of LLPs, while Section 63 of Chapter XIII of the LLP Act deals with the winding up and dissolution of LLPs, none of which form the subject matter of the present suit. The disputes raised in the present petition pertain to inter se disputes of the partners of the LLP with regard to business accounts of the LLP and therefore, the remedy of the aggrieved partner would be to file a commercial suit in terms of the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.

Section 9 of the CPC states that Courts shall have the jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature, excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred. Merely because the definition of the “body corporate” under Section 2(1)(d) of the LLP Act includes an LLP, it is not automatically implied that the NCLT would be the competent forum for deciding all disputes inter se the partners of an LLP. Unlike Section 430 of the Companies Act, 2013, there is no bar on the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts under the provisions of the LLP Act. Therefore, in terms of Section 9 of the CPC, the suit shall be maintainable in a Civil Court.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031