Back
G. S. SANDHAWALIA, GURBIR SINGH
Laxmi Pipes Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
District Magistrate – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to securitization proceedings. (Para 1) |
| 2. jurisdiction and alternate remedy under the act. (Para 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. petitioner does not press the writ petition. (Para 3) |
| 4. petitioner is relegated to alternate remedy. (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT
G.S. Sandhawalia, J. (Oral)
Challenge in the present writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been made to the securitization proceedings including the possession notice dated 31.03.2023 (Annexure P-28) issued under Section 14 of the Securitization and Re-construction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short the 'Act').
2. The following order was passed on 17.04.2023:
The main legal principle established in the judgment is that when an alternative remedy is available to the petitioner under the Securitization Act, the High Court should normally not interfere in th....
Point of Law : There is no repugnancy nor inconsistency between the two remedies under the RDB Act and the Securitisation Act, the Supreme Court observed that “Together they constitute one remedy and....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that exceptional circumstances are required for a writ petition against the measures under the Securitisation Act, and the bank cannot proceed with....
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
