Back
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J
Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
HDFC Bank Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of financial transactions and nclat's role (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. il&fs's argument on loan structure and collateral definition (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. examination of contractual clauses and intentions (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. hdfc's counter arguments regarding lease rental facilities (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. judicial interpretations of various agreements (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 6. principle of substance over form in contract interpretation (Para 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 7. legal implications of assigning receivables (Para 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 8. transfer of actionable claims and respective legal standards (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 9. final conclusion on the nature of the transaction (Para 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 10. dismissal of appeal (Para 40) |
JUDGEMENT
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.
1. This appeal1, is preferred by Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services Ltd (hereafter “IL&FS” or “the borrower”) aggrieved by an order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (hereafter, ‘NCLAT’)2. The point in issue is whether the documents executed by IL&FS by which rents were made over to the respondent, Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd (hereafter “HDFC”
or “the
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
