Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.41 seconds)Section 9 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 34 in The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002 [Entire Act]
Section 36 in The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002 [Entire Act]
The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002
The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996
Section 36 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Robust Hotels(P) Ltd.& Ors vs E.I.H Limited & Ors on 7 December, 2016
9. The learned counsel for the applicant placed much reliance in Robust
Hotels(P) Ltd.& Others vs E.I.H Limited & Others [2017 SCC (1) 622] wherein the
Apex Court has held that a party to the lis or the third party who considers an
order passed by a court as voidable or non est, must approach the court of
competent jurisdiction to have the said order set-aside on such grounds, as may be
available in law. In the above case after considering the facts of the case the
Honourble Apex Court has held that the BAR of civil court jurisdiction under
Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act will not apply to the facts of the above case. It
is no doubt that any person ignores or violates the order passed by the Court
deliberately, any action pursuant to such violations cannot be sustained in the eye
of law. But the fact remains in this case either EARCL or the Auction Purchaser
were not made as a party in the application. Much after obtaining the Interim
Order, EARCL and the Auction Purchaser were impleaded in O.A.No.630 of
2020, which clearly indicates that the application lacks bonafide. At any event,
considering the scope of Section 9 of the Act and the jurisdiction of the Court
under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the interim orders cannot
Page 9 / 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
O.A.No.630 of 2020 and A.No.49 of 2021 and
A.Nos.6555 of 2018, 2827, 2828 of 2020
be extended endlessly and the same cannot be converted as perfectual one which
in fact will defeat the scope and object of the Act. In view of the same, the
Original Application in O.A.No.630 of 2020 stands dismissed. A.No.49 of 2021
is allowed. It is open to the Award Holder namely the applicant herein to seek all
their remeides which are available under Order 21 of C.P.C.to realise their debts
and this Order will not preclude the applicant seeking any relief from the
competent court.
1