<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1997 (5) TMI 365 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103849</link>
    <description>Section 9A of the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992 was upheld as valid because it concerns the jurisdiction, powers, authority and procedure of the Special Court in civil matters, not a law on money-lending. The Court read the Seventh Schedule as permitting legislative provision on court administration, civil procedure, evidence, and the jurisdiction and powers of courts within the relevant constitutional field. Vesting civil jurisdiction in the Special Court and excluding ordinary civil court jurisdiction for the covered class of matters was held not to offend constitutional limits. Any challenge to jurisdiction over a particular claim was left to be raised before the Special Court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Feb 2012 17:52:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=140888" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (5) TMI 365 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103849</link>
      <description>Section 9A of the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992 was upheld as valid because it concerns the jurisdiction, powers, authority and procedure of the Special Court in civil matters, not a law on money-lending. The Court read the Seventh Schedule as permitting legislative provision on court administration, civil procedure, evidence, and the jurisdiction and powers of courts within the relevant constitutional field. Vesting civil jurisdiction in the Special Court and excluding ordinary civil court jurisdiction for the covered class of matters was held not to offend constitutional limits. Any challenge to jurisdiction over a particular claim was left to be raised before the Special Court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103849</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>