https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767057 The Delhi HC dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 226, ruling it lacked territorial jurisdiction despite petitioner's claim that part of the cause of action arose in Delhi. The court applied the doctrine of forum non-conveniens, citing SC precedents in Kusum Ingots and State of Goa cases. The HC held that mere partial cause of action within territorial limits doesn't automatically confer jurisdiction, and courts may refuse to exercise discretionary jurisdiction when another forum is more appropriate. The petition concerned rejection of an Advance Authorisation application by DGFT Office, Hyderabad, making Delhi HC an inconvenient forum for adjudication. en-us Fri, 07 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Mar 2025 08:42:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767057 The Delhi HC dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 226, ruling it lacked territorial jurisdiction despite petitioner's claim that part of the cause of action arose in Delhi. The court applied the doctrine of forum non-conveniens, citing SC precedents in Kusum Ingots and State of Goa cases. The HC held that mere partial cause of action within territorial limits doesn't automatically confer jurisdiction, and courts may refuse to exercise discretionary jurisdiction when another forum is more appropriate. The petition concerned rejection of an Advance Authorisation application by DGFT Office, Hyderabad, making Delhi HC an inconvenient forum for adjudication. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 07 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767057