1996 (7) TMI 464

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... No. 3849 of 1986 is the revision petitioner before this court. The decree-holder is a company known as Sudarsan Chits (India) Limited, now under liquidation as per proceedings of the High Court of Kerala, at Ernakulam. When the execution petition was filed before the District Munsif's Court, Dharmapuri, the revision petitioner filed objections stating that the court has no jurisdiction to e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the provisions of section 10 of the Companies Act which deals with jurisdiction of courts. I do not think any of these provisions has any relevancy since the very decision which learned counsel is relying on, is an answer to all his contentions. The case that is cited is one coming under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. Section 3 of that Act corresponds to section 10 of the present Act. Section 200....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....which alone is competent to execute the order and, since the District Court is not a company court, it cannot execute the order sent to it by this court. It is not possible to accept this contention. It is true that the District Court has not been made a company court by any notification under section 3. Section 164 is not quite relevant for this purpose. What section 164 concerns itself with is t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t order in the same manner as if it was a decree in a civil suit passed by this court and it is under this provision that sections 38 and 39 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, get attracted under which this court would be competent to transfer the order for execution to a competent subordinate court. It will thus be plain that while initially the certified copy must be produced before a court with....