HIGH COURT OF DELHI
M/S DIAMOND ENTERTAINMENT TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. & ORS. – Appellant
Versus
RELIGARE FINVEST LIMITED THROUGH ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER – Respondent
JUDGEMENT
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J. Rev. Petition 296/2022
1. A review petition under Order XLVII read with Section 114 and 151 of the CPC has been filed on behalf of the petitioner (who was the respondent in the main petition) seeking review of the Order dated 14.10.2022 allowing the petition under Section 11 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 1996”) and an Arbitrator was appointed for adjudication of the disputes.
2. It is submitted that the respondent (who was the petitioner in the main petition) therein had mislead the Court by relying on the Full Bench Judgement of Delhi High Court titled as HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. Satpal Singh Bakshi reported in 2012 SCC OnLine Del 4815, which has been overruled by the Supreme Court in the case titled as Vidya Drolia and Ors. Vs. Durga Trading Corporation reported in (2021) 2 SCC 1. The law as laid down in HDFC (Supra) is no longer good law. It has been held in Vidya Drolia (supra) that there is a prohibition against the waiver of jurisdiction of Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) by necessary implication under Section 34 and 35 of the SARFAESI Act and any claim against the measures taken
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.