2003 (11) TMI 357 - HC - Companies Law

Summary

Issues: Jurisdiction of the Court for winding up petition.

Analysis:
The petitioners filed a Company Petition under sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 seeking winding up of the respondent's company. The respondents objected to the maintainability of the petition, citing that the Court where the registered office of the company is situated has jurisdiction as per the Act, 1956. The petitioners argued that the cause of action arose in Jaipur jurisdiction, where the work was executed, and thus, the Court in Jaipur had jurisdiction to entertain the petition. However, it was established that the registered office of the respondent company was in Kolkata, as admitted by both parties. Section 10 of the Act, 1956 specifies that the jurisdiction of the Court shall be based on the location of the company's registered office, unless specified otherwise. Since the registered office was in Kolkata, the Court concluded that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the petition, leading to the dismissal of the company petition.

In conclusion, the High Court ruled that due to the registered office of the respondent company being in Kolkata, the Court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the winding-up petition. As per the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, the jurisdiction is determined based on the location of the registered office of the company. Since the cause of action did not fall under any exception granting jurisdiction to a different Court, the High Court held that the petition was not maintainable in their jurisdiction and subsequently dismissed the company petition.