HARISH TANDON
Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited (HDFC Ltd. ) – Appellant
Versus
Dorjee Dolma Bhutia – Respondent
Harish Tandon, J.—The point emerged for consideration in this revisional application is to whether the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred under Section 34 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (In short SARFAESI). The challenge is made to an order no. 9 dated February 9, 2015 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Siliguri in Title Suit No. 103 of 2014 rejecting an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code.
2. The aforesaid suit is filed by the plaintiff/opposite party for declaration of their ownership in respect of the suit property, with further declaration that the defendant no.3 & 4, the petitioner herein, have no right to take possession thereof by ousting her and have no right to sale the suit property to a third party for realization the loan amount and permanent injunction restraining the petitioners from entering into the suit property and also from disturbing the peaceful possession of the plaintiff/opposite party no.1.
3. The facts emanate from the plaint are that one Mr. Mani Kumar Gurung inherited the suit property from his father late Dhan Bahadur Gurung who purchased the same th
Mardia Chemicals Ltd; & others; v. Union of India and others
United Bank of India v. Satyawait Tondon
Jagdish Singh v. Heeralal & Others
Standard Chartered Bank v. V. Noble Kumar & Others
Harshad Govardhan Sondagar v. International Assets Reconstruction Co. Ltd.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.