TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 616X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e court to entertain the writ petition - reliance placed on the decision of the case Zeenath International Supplies V. Commissioner of Customs, Visakhapatnam, [2014 (3) TMI 676 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] - Held that: - when there is a conclusion that the litigation amounts to forum shopping, the Court would refuse to exercise discretion to entertain a writ petition - writ petition not maintainable and d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 21.06.2004. 3. The learned Standing Counsel for the Customs Department raised a preliminary objection as regards maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that this Court does not have territorial jurisdiction to entertain this Writ Petition. To support his contention, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court [in which I am one of the party] in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isdiction to deal with the matter and the Delhi High Court was directed to deal the matter on merits. Therefore, the decision in the case of the Canon Steels P. Ltd., (supra), does not in any manner advance the case of the appellant and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ambica Industries, referred supra, would be squarely applicable to the facts of the case. 16. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Andhra Bank, reported in (2005) 5 CTC 721. Similarly in the case of R.Raman V. National Insurance Company Ltd. (supra), the decision was rendered with reference to jurisdiction to issue a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the light of clause (2) of Article 226. Therefore, the decisions are wholly inapplicable to the facts of the case on hand, we have no hesitation to hold that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
