Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.96 seconds)The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002
Section 14 in The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002 [Entire Act]
Babu Ram Prakash Chandra Maheshwari vs Antarim Zila Parishad Muzaffar Nagar on 2 August, 1968
46. It must be remembered that stay of an action initiated by
the State and/or its agencies/instrumentalities for recovery
of taxes, cess, fees, etc. seriously impedes execution of
projects of public importance and disables them from
discharging their constitutional and legal obligations
towards the citizens. 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 (sic 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
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed By:SHITU
NAGPAL
Signing Date:18.11.2021
10:46:05 W.P.(C) 12970/2021 Page 5 of 9
stay in such matters. Of course, if the petitioner is able to
show that itscase falls within any of the exceptions carved
out in Baburam Prakash Chandra Maheshwari v. Antarim
Zila Parishad [AIR 1969 SC 556] , Whirlpool Corpn. v.
Registrar of Trade Marks [(1998) 8 SCC 1] and Harbanslal
Sahnia v. Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. [(2003) 2 SCC 107] and
some other judgments, then the High Court may, after
considering all the relevant parameters and public interest,
pass an appropriate interim order."
Whirlpool Corporation vs Registrar Of Trade Marks, Mumbai & Ors on 26 October, 1998
46. It must be remembered that stay of an action initiated by
the State and/or its agencies/instrumentalities for recovery
of taxes, cess, fees, etc. seriously impedes execution of
projects of public importance and disables them from
discharging their constitutional and legal obligations
towards the citizens. 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 (sic 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
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed By:SHITU
NAGPAL
Signing Date:18.11.2021
10:46:05 W.P.(C) 12970/2021 Page 5 of 9
stay in such matters. Of course, if the petitioner is able to
show that itscase falls within any of the exceptions carved
out in Baburam Prakash Chandra Maheshwari v. Antarim
Zila Parishad [AIR 1969 SC 556] , Whirlpool Corpn. v.
Registrar of Trade Marks [(1998) 8 SCC 1] and Harbanslal
Sahnia v. Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. [(2003) 2 SCC 107] and
some other judgments, then the High Court may, after
considering all the relevant parameters and public interest,
pass an appropriate interim order."
Harbanslal Sahnia And Anr. vs Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. And Ors. on 20 December, 2002
46. It must be remembered that stay of an action initiated by
the State and/or its agencies/instrumentalities for recovery
of taxes, cess, fees, etc. seriously impedes execution of
projects of public importance and disables them from
discharging their constitutional and legal obligations
towards the citizens. 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 (sic 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
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed By:SHITU
NAGPAL
Signing Date:18.11.2021
10:46:05 W.P.(C) 12970/2021 Page 5 of 9
stay in such matters. Of course, if the petitioner is able to
show that itscase falls within any of the exceptions carved
out in Baburam Prakash Chandra Maheshwari v. Antarim
Zila Parishad [AIR 1969 SC 556] , Whirlpool Corpn. v.
Registrar of Trade Marks [(1998) 8 SCC 1] and Harbanslal
Sahnia v. Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd. [(2003) 2 SCC 107] and
some other judgments, then the High Court may, after
considering all the relevant parameters and public interest,
pass an appropriate interim order."
Shrim Industries And Ors vs Bank Of Baroda And Anr on 10 November, 2021
7. It is clear from the above that the Chairperson of the DRAT has
jurisdiction to transfer a case from one DRT under his/her jurisdiction to
another DRT. In the present situation where the office of the Chairperson
of DRAT, Delhi is also vacant, this Court has taken the view that
exercise of such power by this Court would be the appropriate course, as
the petitioner's ordinary statutory remedy has been rendered unavailable
for reasons beyond its control. Enabling a party to invoke that remedy is
preferable to entertaining the case on merits in writ proceedings. Orders
to this effect have been passed inter alia in W.P.(C) 12125/2021 [Shrim
Industries And Ors. vs. Bank of Baroda And Anr.] and W.P.(C)
12595/2021 [Smt. Kamlesh vs. Indian Overseas Bank] on 10.11.2021.
C. Bright vs The District Collector on 5 November, 2020
10. The observations in Satyawati Tondon (supra) have been followed
by the Supreme Court inter alia in Authorized Officer, State Bank of
Travancore and Another vs. Mathew K.C. (2018) 3 SCC 85 [paragraphs
5, 9 to 15], and the recent judgment in C. Bright vs. District Collector
and Others (2021) 2 SCC 392 [paragraph 22].