https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97611 The District Court had jurisdiction to entertain the application under section 75(4) of the Companies Act, 1956, despite initially declining due to lack of notification empowering it under the new Act. The court held that a government notification from 1947 continued under the new Act, allowing the District Court to have jurisdiction. As section 75 was not an excepted section, the civil revision petition was allowed, the District Judge's order was set aside, and the application was directed for proper disposal without costs. en-us Thu, 30 Oct 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Jan 2012 14:34:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97611 The District Court had jurisdiction to entertain the application under section 75(4) of the Companies Act, 1956, despite initially declining due to lack of notification empowering it under the new Act. The court held that a government notification from 1947 continued under the new Act, allowing the District Court to have jurisdiction. As section 75 was not an excepted section, the civil revision petition was allowed, the District Judge's order was set aside, and the application was directed for proper disposal without costs. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 30 Oct 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97611