Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 89 (0.43 seconds)
Documents citing State Bank Of India vs Trade Aid Paper And Allied Products ... on 25 May, 1995

Icici Bank Ltd. vs Sabir And Anr. on 5 January, 2016

(Emphasis is mine) 6.4 To be noted, the abovementioned Full Bench judgement of the Bombay High Court in State Bank of India vs Trade Aid Paper and Allied Products (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. case was taken up in appeal FAO 10/2016 Page 5 of 7 to the Supreme Court only on one issue which was qua the embargo put in place by the court on the aspect of sale of the property by the receiver prior to a decree being passed in the suit.
Delhi High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 12 - R Shakdher - Full Document

Icici Bank Ltd. vs Updesh Nagar on 5 January, 2016

(Emphasis is mine) 6.4 To be noted, the abovementioned Full Bench judgement of the Bombay High Court in State Bank of India vs Trade Aid Paper and Allied Products (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. case was taken up in appeal to the Supreme Court only on one issue which was qua the embargo FAO 7/2016 Page 5 of 7 put in place by the court on the aspect of sale of the property by the receiver prior to a decree being passed in the suit.
Delhi High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 265 - R Shakdher - Full Document

M/S Icici Bank Limited vs Sandeep Seth on 30 April, 2019

6.3 Briefly, the court in its judgment exhorts adoption of a CM(M)384/2017 Page 3 practical approach while exercising power of appointment of a receiver in the case of banks and financial institutions having regard to the fact that they deal in public funds "...Indeed, it is the duty and function of the Court entertaining the suits instituted by Banks and financial institutions to ensure that efforts are made to dispose of the suits as early as possible and even during the pendency of the suits, ensure that not only the properties are protected but the Respondent is made to repay the amount, if desirous of enjoying the benefits secured by obtaining the loan. The powers of the Court under Order 40, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure are to be exercised to advance cause of justice and what is "just and convenient" depends upon the nature of the claim and the surrounding circumstances. The Court should not close eyes to the realities and blindly follow the CM (M) 140/2019 Page 4 of 9 principles laid down 50years before when the suits by Banks and financial institutions were a novelty. The economic liberalization and the policy of the Government to grant loans for various activities have increased the number of suits by Banks and financial institutions and in this Court every year more than 2,000 suits are instituted. It would not be difficult to imagine how much public money is involved in these suits and how long the Nationalised Banks and financial institutions are deprived of their dues. The Court should be conscious of these facts and should be more pragmatic in exercising powers under Order 40, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure." (Emphasis is mine) 6.4 To be noted, the abovementioned Full Bench judgement of the Bombay High Court in State Bank of India vs Trade Aid Paper and Allied Products (India) Pvt. Ltd & Ors. case was taken up in appeal to the Supreme Court only on one issue which was qua the embargo put in place by the court on the aspect of sale of the property by the receiver prior to a decree CM(M)384/2017 Page 4 being passed in the suit.
Delhi High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 1 - A Malhotra - Full Document

M/S Icici Bank Limited vs Jetesh Prasher on 30 April, 2019

6.3 Briefly, the court in its judgment exhorts adoption of a CM(M)384/2017 Page 3 practical approach while exercising power of appointment of a receiver in the case of banks and financial institutions having regard to the fact that they deal in public funds "...Indeed, it is the duty and function of the Court entertaining the suits instituted by Banks and financial institutions to ensure that efforts are made to dispose of the suits as early as possible and even during the pendency of the suits, ensure that not only the properties are protected but the Respondent is made to repay the amount, if desirous of enjoying the benefits secured by obtaining the loan. The powers of the Court under Order 40, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure are to be exercised to advance cause of justice and what is "just and convenient" depends upon the nature of the claim and the surrounding circumstances. The Court should not close eyes to the realities and blindly follow the principles laid down 50years before when the suits by Banks and financial institutions were a novelty. The economic liberalization and the policy of the Government to grant loans for various activities have increased the number of suits by Banks and financial institutions and in this Court every year more than 2,000 suits are instituted. It would not be difficult to imagine how much public money is involved in these suits and how long the Nationalised Banks and financial institutions are deprived of their dues. The Court should be conscious of these facts and should be more pragmatic in exercising powers under Order 40, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure." (Emphasis is mine) 6.4 To be noted, the abovementioned Full Bench judgement of the Bombay High Court in State Bank of India vs Trade Aid Paper and Allied Products (India) Pvt. Ltd & Ors. case was taken up in appeal to the Supreme CM (M) 138/2019 Page 4 of 9 Court only on one issue which was qua the embargo put in place by the court on the aspect of sale of the property by the receiver prior to a decree CM(M)384/2017 Page 4 being passed in the suit.
Delhi High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - A Malhotra - Full Document

M/S Icici Bank Limited vs Afsar Ali on 30 April, 2019

6.3 Briefly, the court in its judgment exhorts adoption of a CM(M)384/2017 Page 3 practical approach while exercising power of appointment of a receiver in the case of banks and financial institutions having regard to the fact that they deal in public funds "...Indeed, it is the duty and function of the Court entertaining the suits instituted by Banks and financial institutions to ensure that efforts are made to dispose of the suits as early as possible and even during the pendency of the suits, ensure that not only the properties are protected but the Respondent is made to repay the amount, if desirous of enjoying the benefits secured by obtaining the loan. The powers of the Court under Order 40, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure are to be exercised to advance cause of justice and what is "just and convenient" depends upon the nature of the claim and the surrounding circumstances. The Court should not close eyes to the realities and blindly follow the principles laid down 50years before when the suits by Banks and financial institutions were a novelty. The economic liberalization and the policy of the Government to grant loans for various activities have increased the number of suits by Banks and financial institutions and in this Court every year more than 2,000 suits are instituted. It would not be difficult to imagine how much public money is involved in these suits and how long the Nationalised Banks and financial institutions are deprived of their dues. The Court should be conscious of these facts and should be more pragmatic in exercising powers under Order 40, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure." (Emphasis is mine) 6.4 To be noted, the abovementioned Full Bench judgement of the Bombay High Court in State Bank of India vs Trade Aid Paper and Allied Products (India) Pvt. Ltd & Ors. case was taken up in appeal to the Supreme CM (M) 139/2019 Page 4 of 9 Court only on one issue which was qua the embargo put in place by the court on the aspect of sale of the property by the receiver prior to a decree CM(M)384/2017 Page 4 being passed in the suit.
Delhi High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - A Malhotra - Full Document

M/S. Icici Bank Ltd vs Marshal Overseas Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. on 11 April, 2017

(Emphasis is mine) 6.4 To be noted, the abovementioned Full Bench judgement of the Bombay High Court in State Bank of India vs Trade Aid Paper and Allied Products (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. case was taken up in appeal to the Supreme Court only on one issue CM(M) 347/2017 Page 3 of 5 which was qua the embargo put in place by the court on the aspect of sale of the property by the receiver prior to a decree being passed in the suit.
Delhi High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - J Nath - Full Document

M/S. Icici Bank Ltd vs Shikander Kumar on 11 April, 2017

(Emphasis is mine) 6.4 To be noted, the abovementioned Full Bench judgement of the Bombay High Court in State Bank of India vs Trade Aid Paper and Allied Products (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. case was CM(M) 378/2017 Page 3 of 5 taken up in appeal to the Supreme Court only on one issue which was qua the embargo put in place by the court on the aspect of sale of the property by the receiver prior to a decree being passed in the suit.
Delhi High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - J Nath - Full Document

M/S. Icici Bank Ltd vs Shyam Pal on 11 April, 2017

(Emphasis is mine) 6.4 To be noted, the abovementioned Full Bench judgement of the Bombay High Court in State Bank of India vs Trade Aid Paper and Allied Products (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. case was CM(M) 376/2017 Page 3 of 5 taken up in appeal to the Supreme Court only on one issue which was qua the embargo put in place by the court on the aspect of sale of the property by the receiver prior to a decree being passed in the suit.
Delhi High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - J Nath - Full Document

Icici Bank Ltd vs Rajarshi Guha on 27 January, 2017

(Emphasis is mine) 6.4 To be noted, the abovementioned Full Bench judgement of the Bombay High Court in State Bank of India vs Trade Aid Paper and Allied Products (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. case was Page 3 of 5 taken up in appeal to the Supreme Court only on one issue which was qua the embargo put in place by the court on the aspect of sale of the property by the receiver prior to a decree being passed in the suit.
Delhi High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - J Nath - Full Document

Icici Bank Ltd vs Fajal Elahi on 27 January, 2017

(Emphasis is mine) 6.4 To be noted, the abovementioned Full Bench judgement of the Bombay High Court in State Bank of India vs Trade Aid Paper and Allied Products (India) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. case was Page 3 of 5 taken up in appeal to the Supreme Court only on one issue which was qua the embargo put in place by the court on the aspect of sale of the property by the receiver prior to a decree being passed in the suit.
Delhi High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - J Nath - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next