Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Mohit Krishna Sharma (Director) & 2 Ors vs Union Of India & 1 Anr on 2 May, 2014

Bench: Chief Justice, J.B.Pardiwala

      C/SCA/6581/2014                                      JUDGMENT




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

       SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6581 of 2014


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
MR. BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE                        Sd/-
J.B.PARDIWALA

==========================================
===============
1   Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed No
    to see the judgment ?

2    To be referred to the Reporter or not ?`                  No

3    Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy         No
     of the judgment ?

4    Whether this case involves a substantial question No
     of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of
     India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?

5    Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?       No


==========================================
===============
         MOHIT KRISHNA SHARMA (DIRECTOR) & 2 ORS.
                          Versus
                  UNION OF INDIA & 1 ANR.
==========================================
===============
Appearance:
MR SP MAJMUDAR, ADVOCATE for the Petitioners.
==========================================
===============

       CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
              MR. BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA
              and
              HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA


                               Page 1 of 3
         C/SCA/6581/2014                                  JUDGMENT




                          Date : 02/05/2014

                        ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA) By filing this Special Civil Application, the petitioners have prayed for declaring section 2(1)(o) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, [the Securitisation Act, hereafter] as ultra vires the Constitution of India. The petitioners have also prayed for declaring paragraph 2.1 of the RBI guidelines known as Income Recognition and Prudential Norms as ultra vires the Constitution of India and the Securitisation Act.

By our common CAV judgment dated 24th April 2014 passed in Special Civil Application No. 14908 of 2012 and analogous matters, we have disposed of 79 writ-applications raising similar challenge by partly allowing the writ-applications by holding that paragraph 2.1 of the RBI Guidelines is intra vires Article 14 of the Constitution of India and, at the same time, holding that the amended provisions of section 2(1)(o) of the Securitisation Act are ultra vires the Article 14 of the Constitution and the object of the Securitisation Act itself and consequently, we restored the provisions which existed earlier, i.e. prior to the amendment of 2004 and existed at the time of decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mardia Chemicals Ltd. v. Union of India reported in AIR 2004 SC 2371.

For the selfsame reasons and grounds recorded in our common CAV judgment dated 24th April 2014 passed in Special Civil Application No. 14908 of 2012 and analogous matters, we partly allow this writ-application by holding that the amended provisions of Page 2 of 3 C/SCA/6581/2014 JUDGMENT section 2(1)(o) of the Securitisation Act are ultra vires the Article 14 of the Constitution and the object of the Securitisation Act itself and consequently, we restore the provisions which existed earlier, i.e. prior to the amendment of 2004. We, however, hold that paragraph 2.1 of the RBI Guidelines is intra vires Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

This writ-application is partly allowed accordingly. No costs.

Sd/-

(BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA, CJ.) Sd/-

(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.) mathew Page 3 of 3