Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 19 (0.56 seconds)
Documents citing Hartaj Singh vs Codrej Agrovet Ltd & Another on 31 May, 2010

G.E. Capital Transportation Financial ... vs Rajendra Parihar on 6 April, 2011

11. Furthermore, in light of the averments contained in the additional affidavit filed by the petitioner, the petitioner is justified in stating that since the matter was still at the pre-summoning stage, the petitioner-company was not heard by the learned MM and had it been afforded an opportunity to be heard, it could have filed such an additional affidavit along with the supporting documents in the trial court, so as to satisfy the court that it had the territorial jurisdiction to proceed with the complaint filed by the petitioner. Reliance can be placed on Crl. M.C. 50 of 2010 entitled Hartaj Singh v. Godrej Agrovet Ltd. & Anr., decided by a coordinate bench of this court on 31.05.2010, wherein at the pre- summoning stage, the complainant (respondent in that case) could not file an additional affidavit and supporting documents to make out a case of territorial jurisdiction. The Single Judge in that case held that if objections as to lack of territorial jurisdiction were raised at the pre- CRL.M.C. 2491/2009 Page 10 of 12 summoning stage, the complainant could have filed an additional affidavit by way of evidence along with supporting documents to take a categorical stand and justify its stand that the criminal courts in Delhi were vested with territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.
Delhi High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 2 - H Kohli - Full Document

G.E. Capital Transportation Financial ... vs Lakhmanbhai Govindbhai Karmur on 28 February, 2011

12. Furthermore, in light of the averments contained in the additional affidavit filed by the petitioner, the petitioner is justified in stating that since the matter was still at the pre-summoning stage, the petitioner- company was not heard by the learned MM and had it been afforded an opportunity to be heard, it could have filed such an additional affidavit along with the supporting documents in the trial court, so as to satisfy the court that it had the territorial jurisdiction to proceed with the complaint filed by the petitioner. Reliance can be placed on Crl. M.C. 50 of 2010 entitled Hartaj CRL.M.C. 2478/2009 & Ors Page 9 of 11 Singh v. Godrej Agrovet Ltd. & Anr., decided by a coordinate bench of this court on 31.05.2010, wherein at the pre-summoning stage, the complainant (respondent in that case) could not file an additional affidavit and supporting documents to make out a case of territorial jurisdiction. The Single Judge in that case held that if objections as to lack of territorial jurisdiction were raised at the pre-summoning stage, the complainant could have filed an additional affidavit by way of evidence along with supporting documents to take a categorical stand and justify its stand that the criminal courts in Delhi were vested with territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.
Delhi High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 6 - H Kohli - Full Document

G.E. Capital Transportation Financial ... vs Deepak Bhavanji Thakkar on 14 March, 2011

11. Furthermore, in light of the averments contained in the additional affidavit filed by the petitioner, the petitioner is justified in stating that since the matter was still at the pre-summoning stage, the petitioner- company was not heard by the learned MM and had it been afforded an opportunity to be heard, it could have filed such an additional affidavit along with the supporting documents in the trial court, so as to satisfy the court that it had the territorial jurisdiction to proceed with the complaint filed by the petitioner. Reliance can be placed on Crl. M.C. 50 of 2010 entitled Hartaj Singh v. Godrej Agrovet Ltd. & Anr., decided by a coordinate bench of this court on 31.05.2010, wherein at the pre-summoning stage, the complainant (respondent in that case) could not file an additional affidavit and supporting documents to make out a case of territorial jurisdiction. The Single Judge in that case held that if objections as to lack of territorial jurisdiction were raised at the pre-summoning stage, the complainant could have filed an additional affidavit by way of evidence along with supporting documents to take a categorical stand and justify its stand that the criminal courts in Delhi were vested with territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.
Delhi High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 1 - H Kohli - Full Document

G.E. Capital Transportation Financial ... vs Iqbal Khan on 28 February, 2011

11. Furthermore, in light of the averments contained in the additional affidavit filed by the petitioner, the petitioner is justified in stating that since the matter was still at the pre-summoning stage, the petitioner- company was not heard by the learned MM and had it been afforded an opportunity to be heard, it could have filed such an additional affidavit along with the supporting documents in the trial court, so as to satisfy the court that it had the territorial jurisdiction to proceed with the complaint filed by the petitioner. Reliance can be placed on Crl. M.C. 50 of 2010 entitled Hartaj Singh v. Godrej Agrovet Ltd. & Anr., decided by a coordinate bench of this court on 31.05.2010, wherein at the pre-summoning stage, the complainant (respondent in that case) could not file an additional affidavit and supporting documents to make out a case of territorial jurisdiction. The Single Judge in that case held that if objections as to lack of territorial jurisdiction were raised at the pre-summoning stage, the complainant could have filed an additional affidavit by way of evidence along with supporting documents to take a categorical stand and justify its stand that the criminal courts in Delhi were vested with territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.
Delhi High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 2 - H Kohli - Full Document
1   2 Next