Partial deposit before DRAT under Section 18 of SARFAESI Act refundable, reiterates SC [Read Judgment]
8 years, 6 months ago

Partial deposit before DRAT under Section 18 of SARFAESI Act refundable, reiterates SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

Reiterating the dictum laid down in in Axis bank vs. SBS Organics Private Limited, the Supreme Court in KUMAR ALUMINIUM LTD. VS. ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY INDIA has set aside a Delhi High Court Judgment which had refused to interfere with DRAT order which turned down the prayer for refund of the amount deposited in compliance of the requirement of the second proviso to section 18 of. VS. ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY INDIA has set aside a Delhi High Court Judgment which had refused to interfere with DRAT order which turned down the prayer for refund of the amount deposited in compliance of the requirement of the second proviso to section 18 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, for maintaining an appeal. In Axis Bank case, the Apex Court had held that the partial deposit before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal as a pre-condition for considering the appeal on merits in terms of Section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, is neither a secured asset, nor a secured debt, and hence refundable to the appellant on disposal of appeal.

Court Set Section 18 Drat Refundable Reiterates  deposit  vs  set  act  bank  drat  high  sc  refundable  reiterates  axis  read  sarfaesi  reconstruction  court  partial  judgment  order

History of this topic

DRT May Entertain Plea Against Measures To Recover Secured Debts Beyond Limitation If Satisfied With The Reasons: Gauhati High Court
4 months ago

DRT May Entertain Plea Against Measures To Recover Secured Debts Beyond Limitation If Satisfied With The Reasons: Gauhati High Court

Live Law  

The Gauhati High Court has recently held that the Debt Recovery Tribunal has to dispose of an application under SARFAESI Act made against measures to recover secured debts by any person in accordance with Section 24 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act which applies the provisions of the Limitation Act to tribunal proceedings.For context, Section 24 of the …

DRT issues summons to Wadhawans for recovery of ₹846.63-crore bank loan
7 months, 1 week ago

DRT issues summons to Wadhawans for recovery of ₹846.63-crore bank loan

Hindustan Times  

MUMBAI: The Debt Recovery Tribunal, a quasi-judicial body that helps banks and financial institutions recover loans from customers, has issued a public summons to Housing Development and Infrastructure Ltd promoters Rakeshkumar Wadhawan and his son Sarang, in connection with the proceedings initiated by Bank of India for recovery of an outstanding loan amount of ₹846.63 crore from their group firm, …

Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Petition Challenging SARFAESI Condition Of Pre-deposit To Appeal Before DRAT
8 months, 3 weeks ago

Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Petition Challenging SARFAESI Condition Of Pre-deposit To Appeal Before DRAT

Live Law  

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to issue notice in a petition filed by a Company Director challenging the validity of the condition of 50% pre-deposit for an appeal to DRAT under S. 18 of the SARFAESI Act. The main contention of the petitioner was that the provisos to the S. 18 impose the condition of depositing either 50% of …

Section 54F Does Not Envisage That Sale Consideration Obtained From Original Capital Asset Is Mandatorily Utilized For Meeting Cost Of New Asset: Delhi ITAT
10 months, 3 weeks ago

Section 54F Does Not Envisage That Sale Consideration Obtained From Original Capital Asset Is Mandatorily Utilized For Meeting Cost Of New Asset: Delhi ITAT

Live Law  

While allowing deduction u/s 54 of the Income tax Act, the New Delhi ITAT explained that under the light of section 54, exemption of capital gain from being charged to income tax as income of the previous year is attracted when another residential house has been purchased within one year before or two years after the date of transfer or …

NCLAT Delhi: Security Of Refund Of Advance Amount Can't Change Nature Of Transaction Into Financial Debt
1 year, 1 month ago

NCLAT Delhi: Security Of Refund Of Advance Amount Can't Change Nature Of Transaction Into Financial Debt

Live Law  

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal New Delhi Bench, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan, Mr. Barun Mitra, and Mr. Arun Baroka held that the Security of refund of the advance amount cannot change the nature of transaction into financial debt. NCLAT Verdict: The NCLAT New Delhi dismissed the appeal and held that the Security of refund of advance amount cannot change …

Special Appeal Against Order Of Single Judge Dealing With Order Of DRAT Maintainable: Allahabad High Court
1 year, 2 months ago

Special Appeal Against Order Of Single Judge Dealing With Order Of DRAT Maintainable: Allahabad High Court

Live Law  

The Allahabad High Court has upheld the maintainability of a special appeal filed under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 against an order of single judge dealing the order of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal. Observing that the Debt Recovery Tribunal was constituted in exercise of powers under Entry 45 of the Union List, the …

Supreme Court Dismisses Axis Bank's Appeal, Upholds Condonation of Delay In CIRP By SBI Against Corporate Debtor
1 year, 6 months ago

Supreme Court Dismisses Axis Bank's Appeal, Upholds Condonation of Delay In CIRP By SBI Against Corporate Debtor

Live Law  

The Supreme Court today dismissed an appeal by Axis Bank Limited, thereby affirming the condonation of delay in initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process by the State Bank of India against a corporate debtor under Section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Notably, Axis Bank Limited, though not party to the original Section 7 application, filed an appeal challenging …

Challenge To Recovery Notice U/S 13(2) SARFAESI Act Lies Before DRT And Not Civil Court, Unless Plaint Alleges Fraud: Bombay High Court
1 year, 9 months ago

Challenge To Recovery Notice U/S 13(2) SARFAESI Act Lies Before DRT And Not Civil Court, Unless Plaint Alleges Fraud: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court recently held that once a secured creditor issues demand notice under section 13 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, the civil court’s jurisdiction is barred, and any challenge to the notice comes under the domain of the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Justice MS Jawalkar rejected a borrower’s civil suit alleging that the bank violated Guidelines on Fair Practices …

S.17 SARFAESI Act | Recovery Action May Have Disastrous Consequences For Borrower, DRT Must Pass Interim Order Upon Application Of Mind: Kerala HC
1 year, 9 months ago

S.17 SARFAESI Act | Recovery Action May Have Disastrous Consequences For Borrower, DRT Must Pass Interim Order Upon Application Of Mind: Kerala HC

Live Law  

The Kerala High Court recently held that interim orders passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal under 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 cannot be issued mechanically and without application of mind. On Maintainability The Court held that in cases where the Tribunal has failed to exercise its jurisdiction properly, requiring …

Weekly Digest Of IBC Cases: 15 To 21 May 2023
1 year, 10 months ago

Weekly Digest Of IBC Cases: 15 To 21 May 2023

Live Law  

Supreme Court Supertech Insolvency: Supreme Court Approves 'Project Wise Resolution' Plan Case Title: Indiabulls Asset Reconstruction Company Limited v Ram Kishore Arora & Ors. 05/MB-IV/2020 The National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai bench, comprising of Shri Kishore Vemulapalli and Shri Prabhat Kumar, has initiated Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against M/s Tulip Hotels Private Limited. 827/MB-IV/2022 The National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai …

SARFAESI | Bank Can't Forfeit Deposit Made After Auction Purchase When Bidder Wasn't Informed Of Challenge Pending Against Sale : Supreme Court
1 year, 11 months ago

SARFAESI | Bank Can't Forfeit Deposit Made After Auction Purchase When Bidder Wasn't Informed Of Challenge Pending Against Sale : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court has granted relief to an auction purchaser by directing the refund of the deposit made by him, which was forfeited by the bank by invoking Rule 9 of Security Interest Rules, 2002.Rule 9 enables the bank to forfeit the deposit amount on default of the auction purchaser to deposit the balance bid amount within the stipulated time. …

Union Govt’s Duty To Ensure Fully Functional DRTs On Unhindered Basis, Non-Availability Renders Litigants Remediless: Delhi High Court
1 year, 11 months ago

Union Govt’s Duty To Ensure Fully Functional DRTs On Unhindered Basis, Non-Availability Renders Litigants Remediless: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has observed that it is the duty of the Union Ministry of Finance to ensure that the Debt Recovery Tribunals in the national capital are fully functional on an unhindered basis as their non-availability renders litigants remediless. A division bench of Justice Najmi Waziri and Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain observed that pro-active measures are expected in …

Borrower Has To Pre-deposit 50% Of Which Amount In Appeal Before DRAT U/S 18 SARFAESI Act? Supreme Court Explains
2 years, 2 months ago

Borrower Has To Pre-deposit 50% Of Which Amount In Appeal Before DRAT U/S 18 SARFAESI Act? Supreme Court Explains

Live Law  

While calculating the amount to be deposited as predeposit under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 50% of which amount the borrower is required to deposit as pre-deposit? The bench of Justices M R Shah and B V Nagarathna held as follows: Whatever amount is mentioned in the notice under Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act, in case steps taken …

Challenge Under Section 17 Of The SARFAESI Act Against Action Taken By Secured Creditor, Would Not Bar Arbitration Proceedings: Delhi High Court
2 years, 4 months ago

Challenge Under Section 17 Of The SARFAESI Act Against Action Taken By Secured Creditor, Would Not Bar Arbitration Proceedings: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has reiterated that arbitration proceedings and proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interests Act, 2002 can go hand in hand. The single bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao held that even if a party intended to take action under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act by filing a petition …

Bar On Civil Court Jurisdiction U/Sec 34 SARFAESI Applicable Only In A Case Where DRT/DRAT Is Empowered To Decide The Matter: Supreme Court
2 years, 4 months ago

Bar On Civil Court Jurisdiction U/Sec 34 SARFAESI Applicable Only In A Case Where DRT/DRAT Is Empowered To Decide The Matter: Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court observed that the bar on Civil Court jurisdiction under section 34 of the SARFAESI Act shall be applicable only in a case where the Debt Recovery Tribunal and/or Appellate Tribunal is empowered to decide the matter under the SARFAESI Act.In this case, the Bank secured a property in exercise of powers under the provisions of the SARFAESI …

Initiation Of Proceedings Under The SARFAESI Act Does Not Bar The Arbitration Of Disputes: Delhi High Court
2 years, 5 months ago

Initiation Of Proceedings Under The SARFAESI Act Does Not Bar The Arbitration Of Disputes: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 provides a remedy in addition to the adjudication under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and hence, initiation of proceedings under the SARFAESI Act does not bar the arbitration of disputes. The petitioners invoked the arbitration …

Amount Paid Towards One Time Settlement Is An Asset Of The Corporate Debtor: NCLAT Delhi
2 years, 5 months ago

Amount Paid Towards One Time Settlement Is An Asset Of The Corporate Debtor: NCLAT Delhi

Live Law  

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal bench comprising of Justice Anant Bijay Singh and Ms. Shreesha Merla held that the amount deposited towards the One-time settlement by the Corporate Debtor will be an asset of the Corporate Debtor and the Resolution Professional is entitled to take custody of the same. It was also submitted that there was an understanding between …

'We Are Tired Of Adjectives, What Due Diligence?' : Bombay High Court To Centre On Delay In Appointment Of DRAT Chairman
3 years, 1 month ago

'We Are Tired Of Adjectives, What Due Diligence?' : Bombay High Court To Centre On Delay In Appointment Of DRAT Chairman

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court on Friday pulled up the Union Government delaying the appointment of Chairperson to the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, and sought a road map on the appointment by next Thursday. The bench led by Chief Justice Dipankar Datta had earlier issued several directions suo-motu, for debt recovery litigants since the High Court is flooded with matters that …

Petitioner Cannot File Writ Petition Before Exercising Remedy U/S 17 Of SARFAESI Act; Madras High Court
3 years, 2 months ago

Petitioner Cannot File Writ Petition Before Exercising Remedy U/S 17 Of SARFAESI Act; Madras High Court

Live Law  

The Madras High Court, in a Bench comprising of Justice M. Duraiswamy and Justice Sathya Narayan Prasad in R. Ganesan v. M/s. ASREC Limited has reiterated the legal position and dismissed the writ petition filed by the Petitioner due to non-exercise of alternate remedy of appeal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. The Petitioner filed a writ petition under …

Whether PMLA Prevails Over SARFAESI Act? Supreme Court To Hear SBI's Plea On October 20
3 years, 5 months ago

Whether PMLA Prevails Over SARFAESI Act? Supreme Court To Hear SBI's Plea On October 20

Live Law  

The Supreme Court will hear on October 20th plea filed by State Bank of India challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court's decision that Prevention Of Money Laundering Act prevails over the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act A Bench comprising Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice. The Supreme Court will hear …

Delhi High Court Rejects RBI Appeal Against Order For Reconsideration Of JSPL Plea For $300 mln Remittance To Mauritius Subsidiary
3 years, 11 months ago

Delhi High Court Rejects RBI Appeal Against Order For Reconsideration Of JSPL Plea For $300 mln Remittance To Mauritius Subsidiary

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court today dismissed an appeal by the Reserve Bank of India against an earlier order of a Single-Judge which had directed the RBI to reconsider an application by Jindal Steel and Power Ltd to transmit $300 million to its wholly owned subsidiary Jindal Steel and Power Ltd.Directing the central bank to reconsider its decision on JSPL's. The …

Pre-Deposit For Filing Appeals Before DRAT Is A Mandatory Requirement: Supreme Court
4 years, 1 month ago

Pre-Deposit For Filing Appeals Before DRAT Is A Mandatory Requirement: Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court observed that entire waiver of pre-­deposit for filing appeal before Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal under Section 21 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, is impermissible.In all cases fifty per cent of the decretal amount i.e. The Supreme Court observed that entire waiver of pre-­deposit for filing appeal before Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal under Section 21 …

Entries In Balance Sheet Do Not Amount To Acknowledgment Of Debt Under Sec 18 Limitation Act : NCLAT Declines Reference Against 'V Padmakumar' Decision
4 years, 3 months ago

Entries In Balance Sheet Do Not Amount To Acknowledgment Of Debt Under Sec 18 Limitation Act : NCLAT Declines Reference Against 'V Padmakumar' Decision

Live Law  

A five-member Bench of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal on Tuesday turned down a reference made by a three-member Bench, seeking re-consideration of the decision in V. Padamakumar Vs. The Bench headed by Justice Bansi Lal Bhat, Acting Chairperson, noted that the impugned Judgment was passed in view of several authoritative pronouncements of the Apex Court, and, "It was …

Disputes Which Are To Be Adjudicated By DRTs Are Not Arbitrable: Supreme Court Overrules 2012 Delhi HC Judgment
4 years, 3 months ago

Disputes Which Are To Be Adjudicated By DRTs Are Not Arbitrable: Supreme Court Overrules 2012 Delhi HC Judgment

Live Law  

Overruling a Full Bench decision of Delhi High Court, the Supreme Court has observed that the disputes which are to be adjudicated by the Debt Recovery Tribunal under the DRT Act are non-arbitrable.To hold that the claims of banks and financial institutions covered under the DRT Act are arbitrable would deprive and deny these institutions of the specific rights including …

SC Pulls Up Centre For Defunct Status & Vacancies In Tribunals
5 years ago

SC Pulls Up Centre For Defunct Status & Vacancies In Tribunals

Live Law  

The Supreme Court today called upon the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta & Additional Solicitor General Atmaram Nadkarni prior to the lunch hour in order to acquaint the Bench regarding the issue of ineffectiveness of working of Tribunals across the country at 2 pm. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta & ASG A. Nadkarni apprised the bench comprising Justices A.M. Khanwilkar & D. …

DRAT Cannot Entertain An Appeal U/s 18 SARFAESI Act Without Insisting On Pre- Deposit: SC [Read Judgment]
5 years ago

DRAT Cannot Entertain An Appeal U/s 18 SARFAESI Act Without Insisting On Pre- Deposit: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Supreme Court has observed that the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal cannot entertain an appeal under Section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, without insisting on pre­-deposit. The bench of Justice Deepak Gupta and Justice Aniruddha Bose set aside the judgment of the Bombay High Court that held that no. The …

Suits With Basic Relief Of Challenging Decree Passed By DRT Not Maintainable: SC [Read Judgment]
5 years ago

Suits With Basic Relief Of Challenging Decree Passed By DRT Not Maintainable: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Supreme Court has observed that the suits with the basic relief of challenging the decree passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal are not maintainable. The Bank filed applications to reject the plaints in exercise of powers under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the ground that considering the provisions of Recovery of Debts due …

SC Reserves Judgment On NDTV's Appeal Against IT Department's Notice For Re-assessment Of Proceedings And Provisional Attachment Of Assets
5 years, 1 month ago

SC Reserves Judgment On NDTV's Appeal Against IT Department's Notice For Re-assessment Of Proceedings And Provisional Attachment Of Assets

Live Law  

Supreme Court on Wednesday reserved Judgement on a Petition filed by New Delhi Television against the Delhi High Court Judgement dismissing the challenge against the notice proposing reassessment proceedings initiated by the Commissioner of Income Tax against the Delhi High Court Judgement dismissing the challenge against the notice proposing reassessment proceedings initiated by the Commissioner of Income Tax is of …

DRT Has No Power To Condone Delay In Filing Review Application Under RDB Act : SC [Read Judgment]
5 years, 1 month ago

DRT Has No Power To Condone Delay In Filing Review Application Under RDB Act : SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Supreme Court has held that the Debts Recovery Tribunal has no power to condone the delay in filing application for review under the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993The Court held that the provisions of Limitation Act, including the provision to condone delay under Section 5 of it, apply only to original applications filed under Section 19 of …

Karnataka HC Dismisses Vijaya Mallya's Review Petition Against Order Directing Deposit Of Rs 3101 Crores [Read Order]
5 years, 6 months ago

Karnataka HC Dismisses Vijaya Mallya's Review Petition Against Order Directing Deposit Of Rs 3101 Crores [Read Order]

Live Law  

Karnataka High Court has rejected a review petition filed by fugitive economic offender Vijay Mallya, challenging a coordinate bench order which in turn had upheld the order by Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, asking Mallya to deposit a sum of Rs.3101 Crore, as a precondition for hearing his appeal against a Debt Recovery Tribunal order. On March 28, the Debt Recovery …

DRTs Not Barred From Deciding Jurisdictional Issues As 'Preliminary Issues', Says Gujarat HC [Read Judgment]
5 years, 6 months ago

DRTs Not Barred From Deciding Jurisdictional Issues As 'Preliminary Issues', Says Gujarat HC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Gujarat High Court has held that the Debt Recovery Tribunals are not barred from deciding a 'preliminary issue' if it is one which goes to the root of the matter and strikes at the very jurisdiction of the Tribunal to decide the application.The bench comprising of Justice Harsha Devani and Justice Vireshkumar B. Mayani was considering a petition seeking …

RDBA, SARFAESI, IBC Doesn't Prevail Over PMLA, Must Be Harmonically Construed: Delhi HC [Read Judgment]
5 years, 11 months ago

RDBA, SARFAESI, IBC Doesn't Prevail Over PMLA, Must Be Harmonically Construed: Delhi HC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has held that the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, SARFAESI Act and Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code does not prevail over the provisions of Prevention of Money-Laundering Act. Justice RK Gauba observed that these laws be construed and enforced in harmony, without one being in derogation of the other with regard to the assets respecting which …

Auction Purchaser Can Challenge Before DRT Action Of Secured Creditor In Forfeiting Deposit Made By It: SC [Read Judgment]
7 years, 3 months ago

Auction Purchaser Can Challenge Before DRT Action Of Secured Creditor In Forfeiting Deposit Made By It: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

Auction purchaser is entitled to challenge the action of the secured creditor before the DRT by filing an application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, the court held.The Supreme Court, in Agarwal Tracom Pvt Ltd Vs Punjab National Bank, has held that an action of secured creditor in forfeiting the deposit made by the auction purchaser is a part …

Borrower Can Prefer Appeal To DRT Even If Mortgaged Property Belongs To Guarantor: Chhattisgarh HC [Read Judgment]
8 years ago

Borrower Can Prefer Appeal To DRT Even If Mortgaged Property Belongs To Guarantor: Chhattisgarh HC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

It is nowhere provided that when secured asset belongs to the guarantor, only the guarantor can prefer an appeal and not the borrower, the court said.The Chhattisgarh High Court, in Manik Mehta vs. UCO Bank, has observed that even when the secured asset belongs to the guarantor, the borrower can also prefer an appeal to the Debt Recovery Tribunal.In the …

Appeal Before DRT Maintainable Even If Amount Involved Is Less Than Rs 10 Lakh: SC [Read Judgment]
8 years, 4 months ago

Appeal Before DRT Maintainable Even If Amount Involved Is Less Than Rs 10 Lakh: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Supreme Court in State Bank of Patiala vs. Mukesh Jain, has held that the Debt Recovery Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal as per Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, even if the amount involved is less than Rs 10 lakh.A bench comprising Justice Anil R Dave …

Appeal Before DRT Maintainable Even If Amount Involved Is Less Than Rs 10 Lakh: SC [Read Judgment]
8 years, 4 months ago

Appeal Before DRT Maintainable Even If Amount Involved Is Less Than Rs 10 Lakh: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Supreme Court in State Bank of Patiala vs. Mukesh Jain, has held that the Debt Recovery Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain an appeal as per Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, even if the amount involved is less than Rs 10 lakh.A bench comprising Justice Anil R Dave …

Partial Deposit before DRAT is neither a secured asset, nor a secured debt; It is refundable to the appellant after disposal of Appeal: SC [Read Judgment]
8 years, 10 months ago

Partial Deposit before DRAT is neither a secured asset, nor a secured debt; It is refundable to the appellant after disposal of Appeal: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Supreme Court in Axis bank vs. SBS Organics Private Limited has held that the partial deposit before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal as a pre-condition for considering the appeal on merits in terms of Section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, is neither a secured asset, nor a. The …

Delhi High Court upholds the vires of Section 14 of SARFAESI Act 2002 [Read Judgment]
9 years, 4 months ago

Delhi High Court upholds the vires of Section 14 of SARFAESI Act 2002 [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

A writ petition in Delhi High Court Challenged the provisions of section 14 of the SARFAESI Act as violative of Article 14, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India and liable to be declared unconstitutional.There were two basic contentions by the petitioner, the firstly regarding the Constitutionality of Section 14 and Secondly, whether CMM is obliged to issue notice to …

Supreme Court orders Sahara group to refund Rs 17, 400-cr to investors in 3 months
12 years, 6 months ago

Supreme Court orders Sahara group to refund Rs 17, 400-cr to investors in 3 months

India TV News  

New Delhi, Aug 31 : In a major setback to the Sahara Group, the Supreme Court today directed two of its companies to refund around Rs 17,400 crore to their investors within three months with 15 per cent interest. A bench of justices K S Radhakrishnan and J S Khehar directed SEBI to take action against the companies, Sahara India …

Discover Related