Back
MADRAS HIGH COURT
*Satish K. Agnihotri, M. Venugopal, JJ.
Palani P. and Another v. Senior Manager Central Bank of India Chennai and Others
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's financial obligations and legal procedures initiated. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding the legality of the magistrate's order. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's assessment of compliance with statutory requirements. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. final ruling on the writ petition, emphasizing the resolution pathway. (Para 9) |
1. The petitioner, by the instant petition, questions the legality and validity of the order dated 26.02.2014 passed by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai - 8 in Crl.M.P. Mo. 840 of 2014, whereby and whereunder, the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has directed to take possession of the property schedule mentioned in the order and further, seeks a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to finalise the settlement proposal submitted by the petitioner on 21.01.2013 through their Settlement Advisory Committee by applying the Special OTS Scheme Guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India applicable to Micro Entrepreneurs.
2. The indisputable facts, in nutshell, are that the first petitioner availed cash credit hypothecation limit of Rs.50 lakhs, working capital term loan of Rs.1 crore and Ad hoc limit of Rs. 13.85 lakhs, thus, a total
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
