<?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>2000 (7) TMI 854 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104806</link>
    <description>The territorial jurisdiction for a complaint alleging default in delivery of share certificates under the Companies Act lies where the company&#039;s registered office is situated, because that is where the statutory obligation is performed and the cause of action for default arises. Mere purchase of shares at Hyderabad or dispatch of notices from Hyderabad did not confer jurisdiction on the Special Judge there, since the alleged default concerned a company with its registered office in Mumbai. The complaint was therefore outside the Hyderabad court&#039;s jurisdiction and had to be returned for presentation before the proper court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2012 13:09:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=141845" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (7) TMI 854 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104806</link>
      <description>The territorial jurisdiction for a complaint alleging default in delivery of share certificates under the Companies Act lies where the company&#039;s registered office is situated, because that is where the statutory obligation is performed and the cause of action for default arises. Mere purchase of shares at Hyderabad or dispatch of notices from Hyderabad did not confer jurisdiction on the Special Judge there, since the alleged default concerned a company with its registered office in Mumbai. The complaint was therefore outside the Hyderabad court&#039;s jurisdiction and had to be returned for presentation before the proper court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104806</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>