Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.25 seconds)Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Devilal Modi, Proprietor, M/S. Daluram ... vs Sales Tax Officer, Ratlam And Others on 7 October, 1964
8. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for
the respondents would submit that the learned Single Judge
rightly declined interference in the securitisation proceedings
initiated by the Bank, after taking note of the law laid down by the
Apex Court in Celir LLP v. Sumati Prasad Bafna and Ors.
[2024 SCC OnLine SC 3727], which relied on the decisions in
State of U.P. v. Nawab Hussain [(1977) 2 SCC 806], Devilal
Modi v. Sales Tax Officer, Ratlam and Ors [AIR 1965 SC
1150], and also the English decision in Greenhalgh v. Mallard
[(1947) All ER 255 at p.257]
Section 17 in The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002 [Entire Act]
State Of Uttar Pradesh vs Nawab Hussain on 4 April, 1977
8. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for
the respondents would submit that the learned Single Judge
rightly declined interference in the securitisation proceedings
initiated by the Bank, after taking note of the law laid down by the
Apex Court in Celir LLP v. Sumati Prasad Bafna and Ors.
[2024 SCC OnLine SC 3727], which relied on the decisions in
State of U.P. v. Nawab Hussain [(1977) 2 SCC 806], Devilal
Modi v. Sales Tax Officer, Ratlam and Ors [AIR 1965 SC
1150], and also the English decision in Greenhalgh v. Mallard
[(1947) All ER 255 at p.257]
Section 11 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Varimadugu Obi Reddy vs B. Sreenivasulu on 16 November, 2022
12. Viewed in the light of the law laid down in the decisions
referred to above, conclusion is irresistible that the petitioner
cannot invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, seeking interference with the
proceedings initiated by the appellant Bank under the provisions
of the SARFAESI Act, on the grounds raised in W.P.(C)No.21703 of
2025. Therefore, we find no reason to interfere with the judgment
dated 20.06.2025 of the learned Single Judge, whereby the writ
petition stands dismissed for the reasons stated therein.
Article 12 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
M/S. South Indian Bank Ltd. vs Naveen Mathew Philip on 17 April, 2023
In the said decision,
the Apex Court took judicial notice of the fact that certain High
Courts continue to interfere in such matters, leading to a regular
supply of cases before the Apex Court. The Apex Court reiterated
that a writ of certiorari is to be issued over a decision when the
court finds that the process does not conform to the law or the
statute. In other words, courts are not expected to substitute
themselves with the decision-making authority while finding fault
with the process along with the reasons assigned. Such a writ is
not expected to be issued to remedy all violations. When a Tribunal
is constituted, it is expected to go into the issues of fact and law,
including a statutory violation. A question as to whether such a
violation would be over a mandatory prescription as against a
W.A. No.1581 of 2025 9 2025:KER:48634
discretionary one is primarily within the domain of the Tribunal.
The issues governing waiver, acquiescence and estoppel are also
primarily within the domain of the Tribunal.
Mardia Chemicals Ltd. Etc. Etc vs U.O.I. & Ors. Etc. Etc on 8 April, 2004
The object and
reasons behind the SARFAESI Act are very clear as observed
in Mardia Chemicals Ltd. v. Union of India [(2004) 4 SCC
311]. While it facilitates a faster and smoother mode of
recovery sans any interference from the court, it does provide a
fair mechanism in the form of the Tribunal being manned by a
legally trained mind. The Tribunal is clothed with a wide range of
powers to set aside an illegal order, and thereafter, grant
consequential reliefs, including repossession and payment of
compensation and costs. Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act gives
an expansive meaning to the expression 'any person', who could
approach the Tribunal.