SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Ker) 368

RAJEEV GUPTA, K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN
Mr. Sahir Shah – Appellant
Versus
Bank of India – Respondent


Judgment :-

Radhakrishnan, J.

Whether permission of the Debt Recovery Tribunal is a pre requisite for a Bank or Fianancial Institution to invoke the provisions of Section 13 B of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short “Securitisation Actâ€) after the insertion of the proviso to section 19 of the Enforcement of Security Interests and Recovery of Debts Laws Amendment Act, 2004, is the question that has come up for consideration is this case.

2. Bank of India, respondent herein, filed O.A.No.318 of 2001 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal on 23.11.2001 for realization of an amount of Rs.4,81,92,595.74 from the writ petitioners and others jointly, severally and personally together with interest at 18% per annum with quarterly rests from 23.11.2001 till date of payment and also for costs of the proceeding. While the O.A. was pending, the Bank invoked the provisions of Section 13 (2) of the Securitisation Act vide notice dated 23.1.2004 informing them that an amount of Rs.6,33,65,539/- is outstanding and that the said amount is secured by equitable mortgage of 225 cents of landed property in survey numbers 2073/1





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top