Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 18 (0.47 seconds)Section 13 in The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002 [Entire Act]
Section 29 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
Sidhartha Sarawgi vs Board Of Trustees For Port Of ... on 16 April, 2014
20. Thereafter in para 9 of the said judgment, it
was stated as under:
Hari Chand Aggarwal vs Batala Engineering Co, Ltd on 24 September, 1968
In the case of Hari Chand Aggarwal v. The
Batala Engineering Co. Ltd. and others, reported in
AIR 1969 SC 483, the question before the Hon'ble Apex
Court was the examination of an order passed by the
Punjab and Haryana High Court, and the question was
whether the powers given to the District Magistrate could
be exercised by the Additional District Magistrate. The
Hon'ble Apex Court came to the conclusion that
considering the nature of the duties (to which we shall
come shortly), the powers could not have been delegated.
The Hon'ble Apex Court came to the conclusion that the
District Magistrate and the Additional District Magistrate
are two different and distinct authorities and even in
cases where the Additional District Magistrate has been
authorised to perform the same functions of the District
Magistrate, it would not mean that he is the same as a
District Magistrate. The nature of the powers which were
delegated to the Additional District Magistrate were then
examined by the Hon'ble Apex Court. The powers which
were to be performed by the District Magistrate under the
Defence of India Act, 1962 (in the case before the Hon'ble
Apex Court), were powers of requisitioning of a property.
The powers of requisitioning are of a drastic nature and
therefore considering the drastic nature of powers which
were given to the District Magistrate, the Hon'ble Apex
Court came to the conclusion that such powers could not
have been delegated. The Hon'ble Apex Court had this to
say on this :
Article 19 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Defence of India Act, 1962
M/S Lakshya Concosts Pvt. Ltd. And ... vs Bank Of Baroda And 2 Others on 8 February, 2017
Para 18, 19 and 20 of the judgment in the case of M/s
Lakshya Concosts Pvt. Ltd. (supra) read as under :