Back
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
*Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Ranjan Sharma, JJ.
Neelkanth Yarn v. Punjab National Bank
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner is a firm classified as msme with npa issues. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments on maintainability of the writ petition. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court’s analysis of the npa classification and statutory remedies. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 4. instant petition not maintainable under art.226 of the constitution. (Para 29) |
1. The petitioner - firm, being registered as Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (for short, MSME), is engaged in the business of trading in all types of yarns, fibers, cotton and fabrics and has availed various financial assistances from the respondent - Bank since 2011, which were renewed from time to time.
2. According to the petitioner - firm, after latest renewal, the petitioner - firm was availing a cash credit limit of Rs.11,95,00,000/-, guaranteed emergency credit line limit of Rs.2,19,00,000/- an in - land letter of credit limit of Rs.11,00,00,000/-. It is averred that the petitioner - firm was a profit making firm and its business continued to flourish, however owing to default by its debtors, the petitioner - firm came under financial stress, which stood
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
