https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465208 A plaint may be rejected for want of territorial jurisdiction only where the plaint itself plainly shows that the court lacks jurisdiction; here, the pleadings and documents did not conclusively exclude Delhi jurisdiction, and the defendant's registered office and records were linked to Delhi. A prior employment challenge did not, by itself, bar the present specific performance claim under Order II Rule 2 because the two causes of action were treated as distinct. A defect in filing the matter as an ordinary suit rather than a commercial suit was also curable, and an ESOP scheme was not treated as a shareholders' agreement so as to attract commercial dispute classification. The rejection application therefore failed on all grounds. en-us Tue, 30 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Dec 2025 13:38:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465208 A plaint may be rejected for want of territorial jurisdiction only where the plaint itself plainly shows that the court lacks jurisdiction; here, the pleadings and documents did not conclusively exclude Delhi jurisdiction, and the defendant's registered office and records were linked to Delhi. A prior employment challenge did not, by itself, bar the present specific performance claim under Order II Rule 2 because the two causes of action were treated as distinct. A defect in filing the matter as an ordinary suit rather than a commercial suit was also curable, and an ESOP scheme was not treated as a shareholders' agreement so as to attract commercial dispute classification. The rejection application therefore failed on all grounds. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 30 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465208