Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226(2) was not made out for a writ challenging NCLT, Delhi proceedings initiating personal insolvency against a guarantor. The relevant cause of action arose from proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, and Section 60 placed the Adjudicating Authority in the NCLT having jurisdiction over the corporate person's registered office. As that office was in New Delhi, the fact that the credit facility had been availed in Kerala did not confer jurisdiction on the Kerala High Court. The writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable for want of territorial jurisdiction, and the alternate-remedy objection was left unexamined.
Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226(2) was not made out for a writ challenging NCLT, Delhi proceedings initiating personal insolvency against a guarantor. The relevant cause of action arose from proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, and Section 60 placed the Adjudicating Authority in the NCLT having jurisdiction over the corporate person's registered office. As that office was in New Delhi, the fact that the credit facility had been availed in Kerala did not confer jurisdiction on the Kerala High Court. The writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable for want of territorial jurisdiction, and the alternate-remedy objection was left unexamined.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.