<?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>2022 (10) TMI 261 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428703</link>
    <description>A society resolution authorising an attorney to &quot;proceed&quot; in all cases was held sufficient to empower the representative to institute cheque-dishonour complaints under the Negotiable Instruments Act, because the term covers commencement of proceedings as well as their conduct. In the territorial-jurisdiction issue, the complaint could not be dismissed outright merely for want of jurisdiction; applying the governing cheque-dishonour jurisdiction rules and Section 177 CrPC, the matter was required to be transferred to the court having territorial jurisdiction rather than non-suited. The finding on authorisation was set aside, and the connected matter was remanded for transfer to the proper court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Oct 2022 11:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=692789" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (10) TMI 261 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428703</link>
      <description>A society resolution authorising an attorney to &quot;proceed&quot; in all cases was held sufficient to empower the representative to institute cheque-dishonour complaints under the Negotiable Instruments Act, because the term covers commencement of proceedings as well as their conduct. In the territorial-jurisdiction issue, the complaint could not be dismissed outright merely for want of jurisdiction; applying the governing cheque-dishonour jurisdiction rules and Section 177 CrPC, the matter was required to be transferred to the court having territorial jurisdiction rather than non-suited. The finding on authorisation was set aside, and the connected matter was remanded for transfer to the proper court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428703</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>