https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397488 The High Court allowed the revision, setting aside the judgment and order of the District Judge, South 24 Parganas. The court held that the suit was maintainable under Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act. It directed the trial court to hear the application for injunction on merit within one month, emphasizing that the civil court's jurisdiction was not barred under the Companies Act, 2013, as the case involved individual grievances, not issues of oppression or mismanagement. en-us Thu, 30 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Aug 2020 10:01:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397488 The High Court allowed the revision, setting aside the judgment and order of the District Judge, South 24 Parganas. The court held that the suit was maintainable under Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act. It directed the trial court to hear the application for injunction on merit within one month, emphasizing that the civil court's jurisdiction was not barred under the Companies Act, 2013, as the case involved individual grievances, not issues of oppression or mismanagement. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 30 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397488