Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.72 seconds)The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
M/S. Harman Electronics (P) Ltd. & Anr vs M/S. National Panasonic India Ltd on 12 December, 2008
9. Learned counsel for the Petitioner vehemently
contends that the case of Harman Electronics (Supra) has
been illegally relied upon by the trial court and the same is
distinguishable on facts as in the above said case,
statutory notice was given from Delhi but the entire
transaction had taken place at Chandigarh but therefore,
it had been held that the Delhi courts do not have
territorial jurisdiction as by giving of notice alone,
territorial jurisdiction cannot be created.
Shamshad Begum vs B.Mohammed on 3 November, 2008
13. It needs no elaboration that when two decisions of
coordinate benches of the Apex Court are cited, then the
Crl. Rev. P. No. 199-206/2009 and 210-217/2009 Page 8
later one prevails. The decision of the Apex Court in the
case of Smt. Shamshad Begum (supra) relied upon by the
Petitioner is of 3rd November, 2008; whereas, the Apex
Court decision in the case of M/s. Harman Electronics
(Supra) is of 12th December, 2008.
K. Bhaskaran vs Sankaran Vaidhyan Balan And Anr on 29 September, 1999
I find myself unable to
agree with the reasoning in decision rendered by a Single
Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of
Manjul vs. Wasim Shekh (Supra), as the latest decision of
the Apex Court in the case of M/s. Harman Electronics
(Supra) cannot be brushed aside by simply observing that
it was rendered in a different context and by relying upon
the decision in the case of K. Bhaskaran (Supra).