Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA
NCDEX e Markets Limited – Appellant
Versus
Authorised Officer, Canara Bank – Respondent
Judgment :
Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.
1. The opposite party no. 1/Bank raised a preliminary objection against maintainability of this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before this Court. The preliminary objection raised by the Bank is that the petitioners are required to file instant application before the High Court within whose jurisdiction the Debts Recovery Tribunal is situated. In view thereof, the parties were invited to advance their argument on the issue of jurisdiction only.
2. Before this Court proceeds to deal with the question of jurisdiction, only the facts that are relevant for the purpose of deciding the issue of jurisdiction is set out hereinafter.
3. The opposite party no. 1/Bank filed an application under Section 19 of the Recovery of the Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (for short “the 1993 Act”) for recovery of sum of Rs. 22,96,128/- jointly and severally from the opposite party nos. 2,3 and 4 and the petitioner with future interest at 10% per annum with half yearly rests from October 1, 2019 till the date of realization along with costs. The said application which was registered as Original Application no. 120 of 2020 was filed before the l
The jurisdiction of a High Court under Article 227 pertains only to the Debts Recovery Tribunal located within its territorial limits, not an appellate tribunal for matters originating outside its ju....
The jurisdiction for challenging appellate tribunal orders lies in the High Court corresponding to the original tribunal's location, affirming the principle that appellate orders merge with original ....
The territorial jurisdiction for hearing writ petitions under Article 227 is determined by the location of the original authority, not the appellate authority, as mandated by administrative rules.
Power of judicial review of an order transferring an Original Application pending before a Bench of Tribunal to another Bench under Section 25 of Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 can be judicially ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the jurisdiction of the High Court to hear the petition under the Arbitration Act, IAAP No. 106 of 2016, is restored in view of the decision o....
The judgment emphasized the need for clarifying the territorial jurisdiction of High Courts under Article 226(2) in relation to challenges against orders passed by the Chairman, CAT, Principal Bench,....
Principal Seat retains jurisdiction over writ challenging appellate tribunal order within its territory despite origin in Circuit Bench district; no ouster or mandatory transfer under Rule 3A as appe....
The court established that the location of the Revisionary Authority and the doctrine of merger allow petitioners to file writs in the court where the authority is situated, affirming their right to ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
