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

2018 Supreme(MP) 341

HEMANT GUPTA, VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
Sunil Garg – Appellant
Versus
Bank of Baroda – Respondent


Advocates:
Sanjay Agrawal for petitioner; P. Shankaran for respondent No. 1.

ORDER (Oral)

1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to an order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jabalpur (for brevity ‘the Tribunal’) in proceedings under section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to ‘the Act’). The Tribunal dismissed an application filed under section 17 of the Act on the ground that such an application is not maintainable until actual physical possession is delivered to the secured creditor. It is the said order which is subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition. The petitioner before the Tribunal was aggrieved against an order passed by the District Magistrate, dated 3.7.2017 directing him that physical possession of the property to be delivered to the secured creditor.

2. The relevant provisions of the Act are reproduced hereunder :

“13. Enforcement of security interest. –

(1) ...........

(2) ..........

(3) ...........

(4) In case the borrower fails to discharge his liability in full within the period specified in sub-section (2), the secured creditor may take recourse to one or more of the following measures to recover his secu




























































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