https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299153 Writ petitions challenging attachment-related notices under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act were held not maintainable in the Punjab and Haryana High Court because the impugned action arose from proceedings pending in Maharashtra and the authorities in Chandigarh and Haryana had acted only on communications from the competent Maharashtra authority. The Court applied the principle of territorial jurisdiction and forum conveniens, and declined to entertain the petitions in its writ jurisdiction. The petitioners were left free to pursue their objections before the appropriate forum. A similar jurisdictional view had already been taken in connected litigation. en-us Wed, 25 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 05 Dec 2021 14:39:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299153 Writ petitions challenging attachment-related notices under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act were held not maintainable in the Punjab and Haryana High Court because the impugned action arose from proceedings pending in Maharashtra and the authorities in Chandigarh and Haryana had acted only on communications from the competent Maharashtra authority. The Court applied the principle of territorial jurisdiction and forum conveniens, and declined to entertain the petitions in its writ jurisdiction. The petitioners were left free to pursue their objections before the appropriate forum. A similar jurisdictional view had already been taken in connected litigation. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 25 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299153