Safety Shoes Used as Weapon Meets Mens Rea Requirement for Murder: Rajasthan HC on Bail Denial    |     Right to Be Considered for Promotion, Not a Right to Promotion: Supreme Court Clarifies Eligibility for Retrospective Promotion    |     Inherent Power of Courts Can Recall Admission of Insufficiently Stamped Documents: Supreme Court    |     Courts Cannot Substitute Their Opinion for Security Agencies in Threat Perception Assessments: J&K High Court Directs Reassessment of Political Leader's Threat Perception    |     Service Law | Violation of Natural Justice: Discharge Without Notice or Reason: Gauhati High Court Orders Reinstatement and Regularization of Circle Organizers    |     Jharkhand High Court Quashes Family Court Order, Reaffirms Jurisdiction Based on Minor’s Ordinary Residence in Delhi    |     Ex-Serviceman Status Ceases After First Employment in Government Job: Calcutta High Court Upholds SBI’s Cancellation of Ex-Serviceman's Appointment Over False Declaration of Employment    |     Maxim Res Ipsa Loquitur Applies When State Instrumentalities Are Directly Responsible: Delhi High Court Orders MCD to Pay ₹10 Lakhs Compensation for Death    |     Wilful Avoidance of Service Must Be Established Before Passing Ex Parte Order Under Section 126(2) CrPC: Patna High Court Sets Aside Ex Parte Maintenance Order    |     MP High Court Imposes Rs. 10,000 Costs for Prolonging Litigation, Upholds Eviction of Petitioners from Father's Property    |     When Detention Unnecessary Despite Serious Allegations of Fraud Bail Should be Granted: Kerala HC    |     Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Relocation Alone Cannot Justify Transfer: Supreme Court Rejects Plea to Move Case from Nellore to Delhi, Orders Fresh Probe    |     Punjab & Haryana HC Double Bench Upholds Protection for Married Partners in Live-In Relationships, Denies Same for Minors    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     Smell of Alcohol in Post-Mortem Insufficient to Establish Intoxication: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Liability of Insurance Company in Motor Accident Case    |     No Grounds for Transfer: Free Bus Fare for Women in Telangana Reduces Travel Burden: Telangana High Court Rejects Wife's Petition to Transfer Divorce Case    |    

Delhi High Court Dismisses Writ Petitions for Lack of Territorial Jurisdiction in Bank Fraud Cases

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling concerning the application of territorial jurisdiction, the Delhi High Court today dismissed two writ petitions filed against the Bank of India and Punjab National Bank. The petitions, filed by Pune Buildtech Pvt Ltd and Majestic Infracon Pvt. Ltd., challenged the banks’ decision to declare their accounts as ‘fraud’ under the RBI Master Circular on the Classification and Reporting of Fraud dated 01.07.2016.

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, presiding over the matter, held that the Delhi High Court lacks territorial jurisdiction to entertain these writ petitions. The Court emphasized the importance of the ‘cause of action’ in determining jurisdiction, stating, “The Court examines whether essential facts constituting the cause of action arose within its jurisdiction.”

This observation is crucial as it underscores the principle that not every fact in a dispute confers jurisdiction upon a court. The judgment further elaborated that “the convenience of the parties cannot be the sole criterion for the determination of jurisdiction considering the broader perspective of dynamism of technology and increased access to justice.”

The key contention revolved around the jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court in cases where the primary actions under scrutiny – including loan agreements and the declaration of accounts as fraud – occurred outside its territorial limits, particularly in Mumbai.

The petitions were dismissed, with the Court advising the parties to approach the appropriate jurisdictional High Court. The Court clarified that its decision was strictly on jurisdictional grounds, without delving into the merits of the cases.

 Date of Decision: 19.12.2023

 PUNE BUILDTECH PVT LTD VS BANK OF INDIA

 

Similar News