https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105473 Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 was unavailable to shield a lessee that continued to retain and use wind-mills after the lease period had expired, so the provision could not be used to resist payment of lease rentals or return of the leased assets. The jurisdiction clause was also construed strictly: an exclusion of a competent court's jurisdiction must be clear, unambiguous and specific. Because the lease wording was capable of more than one meaning and did not unmistakably oust other competent courts, the Delhi courts' jurisdiction was not excluded. en-us Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Mar 2012 17:48:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105473 Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 was unavailable to shield a lessee that continued to retain and use wind-mills after the lease period had expired, so the provision could not be used to resist payment of lease rentals or return of the leased assets. The jurisdiction clause was also construed strictly: an exclusion of a competent court's jurisdiction must be clear, unambiguous and specific. Because the lease wording was capable of more than one meaning and did not unmistakably oust other competent courts, the Delhi courts' jurisdiction was not excluded. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 17 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105473