Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: transcore in Leelakrishna Pillai vs Union Bank Of India on 22 March, 2010Matching Fragments
The petitioners have approached this Court, challenging the steps taken by the respondent bank under the SARFAESI Act, for realisation of the due amount under the loan transaction. The grievance projected in the Writ Petition is that, the bank has already filed an O.A. before the DRT and this being the position, there is absolutely no justification for resorting to the steps under the SARFAESI Act, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank submits that, the idea and understanding of the petitioner with regard to the maintainability of the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, notwithstanding the pendency of the proceedings before the DRT is quite wrong and misconceived. The legal position in this regard stands settled in favour of the Bank, by virtue of the decision rendered by the Apex Court, in M/s. Transcore v. Union of India in AIR 2007 (SC)712. This being the position, no interference is called for by this Court.