Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 22 (0.35 seconds)Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 17 in The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002 [Entire Act]
Section 14 in The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002 [Entire Act]
Section 13 in The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002 [Entire Act]
Section 18 in The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002 [Entire Act]
United Bank Of India vs Satyawati Tondon & Ors on 26 July, 2010
"22. Even though, this Court in United Bank of India v. Satyawati
Tondon [United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon, (2010) 8 SCC 110
(2010) 3 SCC (Civ) 260] held that in cases relating to recovery of the
dues of banks, financial institutions and secured creditors, stay granted by
the High Court would have serious adverse impact on the financial health
of such bodies/institutions, which will ultimately prove detrimental to the
economy of the nation. Therefore, the High Court should be extremely
careful and circumspect in exercising its discretion to grant stay in such
matters.
Agarwal Tracom Pvt. Ltd. vs Punjab National Bank on 27 November, 2017
(v) In Agarwal Tracom (P) Ltd. v. Punjab National Bank (2018) 1
SCC 626, the Apex Court has held as follows:-
M/S Hindon Forge Pvt. Ltd. vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh Thr. District ... on 1 November, 2018
Hindon Forge (P) Ltd. [Hindon Forge (P) Ltd. v. State of U.P.,
(2019) 2 SCC 198 : (2019) 1 SCC (Civ) 551] has held that the remedy of
an aggrieved person by a secured creditor under the Act is by way of an
application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, however, borrowers and
other aggrieved persons are invoking the jurisdiction of the High Court
under Articles 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India without availing the
alternative statutory remedy. The Hon'ble High Courts are well aware of
the limitations in exercising their jurisdiction when effective alternative
remedies are available, but a word of caution would be still necessary for
the High Courts that interim orders should generally not be passed
without hearing the secured creditor as interim orders defeat the very
Page 12 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.11797 of 2022
purpose of expeditious recovery of public money."
Phoenix Arc Private Limited vs Vishwa Bharati Vidya Mandir on 12 January, 2022
12.As regards the non-maintainability of the writ petition against
Private financial institutions like assets re-construction companies in respect of
their action under SARFAESI Act, it is relevant to consider the decision of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Phoenix ARC (P) Ltd. v. Vishwa Bharati Vidya
Mandir, (2022) 5 SCC 345 : 2022 SCC OnLine SC 44, wherein, it has been
held as follows:-