https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196487 The Madras HC concluded that it has jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition challenging the order of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal located in Chennai, despite the original Tribunal being in another state. The court ruled that the cause of action, including the Appellate Tribunal's order, is sufficient to confer jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. While the Doctrine of Forum Convenience allows a court to decline jurisdiction based on convenience, it does not negate the court's inherent jurisdiction. The decision in Bhanu Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v. Andhra Bank was deemed incorrect regarding this jurisdictional issue. en-us Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Jan 2024 12:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196487 The Madras HC concluded that it has jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition challenging the order of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal located in Chennai, despite the original Tribunal being in another state. The court ruled that the cause of action, including the Appellate Tribunal's order, is sufficient to confer jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. While the Doctrine of Forum Convenience allows a court to decline jurisdiction based on convenience, it does not negate the court's inherent jurisdiction. The decision in Bhanu Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v. Andhra Bank was deemed incorrect regarding this jurisdictional issue. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196487