https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413545 Inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC was invoked to challenge criminal proceedings in EOCC.No.104/2016 arising from a complaint under Section 165 of the Companies Act, 2013. The dispute concerned whether the Chennai complaint should continue where the petitioner said several companies were outside Chennai jurisdiction and relied on struck-off company status and resigned directorships, while the respondent maintained that only two companies were within Chennai and the rest lay in Coimbatore. The Court held that the complainant must explain why the matter was originally filed at Chennai and, if pursued elsewhere, place those reasons before the competent court, where the petitioner could contest them. The Chennai proceedings were quashed. en-us Mon, 23 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Nov 2021 17:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413545 Inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC was invoked to challenge criminal proceedings in EOCC.No.104/2016 arising from a complaint under Section 165 of the Companies Act, 2013. The dispute concerned whether the Chennai complaint should continue where the petitioner said several companies were outside Chennai jurisdiction and relied on struck-off company status and resigned directorships, while the respondent maintained that only two companies were within Chennai and the rest lay in Coimbatore. The Court held that the complainant must explain why the matter was originally filed at Chennai and, if pursued elsewhere, place those reasons before the competent court, where the petitioner could contest them. The Chennai proceedings were quashed. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 23 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413545