https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103903 A limitation objection to prosecution was not accepted at the quashing stage because the point depended on when the alleged offence came to the complainant's knowledge and required evidence. Territorial jurisdiction was upheld because the prospectus was circulated and acted upon at Jaipur, application money was paid there, and the alleged failure to allot or deliver debentures had consequences there, so the cause of action arose within that court's jurisdiction. Inherent powers were held unsuitable for quashing, as the complaint disclosed a prima facie offence under section 63 of the Companies Act and the defence required trial-level examination. en-us Mon, 01 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Feb 2012 18:42:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103903 A limitation objection to prosecution was not accepted at the quashing stage because the point depended on when the alleged offence came to the complainant's knowledge and required evidence. Territorial jurisdiction was upheld because the prospectus was circulated and acted upon at Jaipur, application money was paid there, and the alleged failure to allot or deliver debentures had consequences there, so the cause of action arose within that court's jurisdiction. Inherent powers were held unsuitable for quashing, as the complaint disclosed a prima facie offence under section 63 of the Companies Act and the defence required trial-level examination. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 01 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103903