2003 (11) TMI 357

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed this Company Petition under sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 ( the Act 1956 ) for winding up of the respondents company. 3. The respondents, in reply to the company petition, raised a preliminary objection re-maintainability of the winding-up petition. In para No. 1 of the reply to the writ petition it is stated that the Company Petition is not maintainable in this Court in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd therefore the entire cause of action arose in Jaipur jurisdiction and not only this, it is clearly evident from Annexure-A/1 that the project office is situated at Jaipur also therefore as the entire cause of action has arose in the present matter in Jaipur district and therefore, this Hon ble Court has jurisdiction to entertain the present company petition." From this reply to the preliminar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ent to which jurisdiction has been conferred on any District Court or the District Courts subordinate to that High Court in pursuance of sub-section (2). It is not the case of the petitioners Company that the matter falls under sub-section (2) of section 10 of the Act, 1956. Sub-section (2) of section 10 of the Act, 1956 provides, except to the extent to which any jurisdiction is expressly conferr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X