https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98699 The Supreme Court held that the Magistrate at Meerut did not have jurisdiction to try complaints under Section 207 of the Companies Act, 1956. The Court determined that the offence location is where the company's registered office is situated, i.e., Delhi, where the obligation to post dividend warrants arises. Therefore, the competent court for such cases would be where the company's registered office is located. The Court allowed the appeals, setting aside the High Court's orders. en-us Tue, 24 Feb 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Aug 2014 09:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98699 The Supreme Court held that the Magistrate at Meerut did not have jurisdiction to try complaints under Section 207 of the Companies Act, 1956. The Court determined that the offence location is where the company's registered office is situated, i.e., Delhi, where the obligation to post dividend warrants arises. Therefore, the competent court for such cases would be where the company's registered office is located. The Court allowed the appeals, setting aside the High Court's orders. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 24 Feb 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98699