https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194121 Clause 12 jurisdiction in a mixed partition suit was held to depend on the nature of each asset. Partition of movables could be entertained where the movables formed part of the cause of action and leave had been obtained, even if ancillary reliefs such as challenge to a release deed were also sought. For immovable property, the suit was a suit for land and could proceed only where the land was within jurisdiction; the later extension of territorial limits to Vikhroli allowed inclusion of that property, but not other immovables outside jurisdiction. Mere beneficial interest in a family business did not amount to carrying on business in Bombay. en-us Mon, 08 Oct 1951 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Aug 2017 17:54:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194121 Clause 12 jurisdiction in a mixed partition suit was held to depend on the nature of each asset. Partition of movables could be entertained where the movables formed part of the cause of action and leave had been obtained, even if ancillary reliefs such as challenge to a release deed were also sought. For immovable property, the suit was a suit for land and could proceed only where the land was within jurisdiction; the later extension of territorial limits to Vikhroli allowed inclusion of that property, but not other immovables outside jurisdiction. Mere beneficial interest in a family business did not amount to carrying on business in Bombay. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 08 Oct 1951 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194121