Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Vijay Goverdhandas Kalantri & Another Vs Union of India & Others (Punjab and Haryana High Court)
Appeal Number : CWP No. 11209 of 2020
Date of Judgement/Order : 04/08/2020
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Vijay Goverdhandas Kalantri & Another Vs Union of India & Others (Punjab and Haryana High Court)

The issue under consideration is whether the filing of the petition without jurisdiction only to gain benefit of its interim order is sustainable in law?

In the present case, admittedly, both the petitioners are residents of Mumbai and the company-respondent no.4 itself is registered with the Registrar of Companies, Mumbai (respondent no.3) and has no connection with the Registrar of Companies, Punjab and Chandigarh (respondent no.2). The counsel for the petitioners has been unable to show how the present writ petition was maintainable before this Court.

In the present case the counsel for the petitioners has been unable to show as to what part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. There is also no averment in the present writ petition as to how any part of the cause of action had arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court.

High Court states that it must be remembered that the image and prestige of a court depends on how the members of that institution conduct themselves. If an impression gains ground that even in cases which fall outside the territorial jurisdiction of the court, certain members of the court would be willing to exercise jurisdiction on the plea that some event, however trivial and unconnected with the cause of action had occurred within the jurisdiction of the said court, litigants would seek to abuse the process by carrying the cause before such members giving rise to avoidable suspicion. That would lower the dignity of the institution and put the entire system to ridicule. We are greatly pained to say so but if we do not strongly deprecate the growing tendency we will, we are afraid, be failing in our duty to the institution and the system of administration of justice. We do hope that we will not have another occasion to deal with such a situation. In view of the above, the present writ petition deserves to be dismissed with exemplary costs. Dismissed with costs of Rs. 1,00,000/- to be deposited by the petitioners with the PM-CARES Fund.

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