<?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>2007 (4) TMI 731 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194997</link>
    <description>The court set aside the judgment regarding the forum selection clause, holding it does not bar the writ petition. However, it upheld that no part of the cause of action arose within the Calcutta High Court&#039;s jurisdiction. The matter was remanded for further consideration on merit, emphasizing that constitutional provisions prevail over private agreements.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Oct 2017 18:41:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=492114" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (4) TMI 731 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194997</link>
      <description>The court set aside the judgment regarding the forum selection clause, holding it does not bar the writ petition. However, it upheld that no part of the cause of action arose within the Calcutta High Court&#039;s jurisdiction. The matter was remanded for further consideration on merit, emphasizing that constitutional provisions prevail over private agreements.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194997</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>