Back
ROBIN PHUKAN
Bhaben Chandra Baishya S/o Late Rama Kanta Baishya – Appellant
Versus
Punjab National Bank – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mrs. S. Goswami, learned counsel for the review petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Parvez, learned counsel for respondent No.1; Mr. R. Sharma, learned counsel for respondent No.4 and Ms. A. Begum, learned counsel for respondent No.3.
2. This application, under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), read with Sections 114 and 151 of the CPC, is preferred by the petitioner, Dr. Bhaben Chandra Baishya for reviewing the judgment and order, dated 02.03.2022, passed by this court in CRP(I/O) 393/2019.
3. The factual backgrounds leading to filing of the present petition is adumbrated herein below:-
No civil court can exercise jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceeding in respect of any matter which the Debt Recovery Tribunal is empowered to determined.
Review petitions in DRT are permissible only for mistakes apparent on the record, not for re-evaluating the merits of prior decisions.
The review of orders under the SARFAESI Act is limited to correcting errors apparent on the record and cannot be used to re-hear matters or consider new evidence.
The jurisdiction of the civil court is excluded in matters related to the classification of loan accounts as NPA under the SARFAESI Act.
Application against measures to recover secured debts – Jurisdiction - Jurisdiction of Civil Court is not ousted. However, Civil Courts have to be extremely cautious while granting any interim order ....
Civil courts lack jurisdiction under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act for matters within the DRT's purview, and vague fraud allegations do not suffice to maintain a civil suit.
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
