Back
SUPREME COURT
A.M. Khanwilkar, J
Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited – Appellant
Versus
Mission Vivacare – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of the case regarding the dispute over recovery proceedings. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments presented by both parties concerning the legality of priority in recoveries. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. court's analysis of legislative intent and interpretative context of sarfaesi and msmed acts. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. court concluded that recovery measures under sarfaesi act prevail over msmed act. (Para 10) |
| 5. final judgment and restoration of single judge's decision. (Para 11 , 12) |
1. Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore dated 11.08.2017 in Writ Appeal No. 248 of 2017, by which the Division Bench of the High Court has allowed the said appeal preferred by respondent No. 1 herein and has quashed and set aside the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge and has observed and held that Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act , 2006 (hereinafter referred to as 'MSMED Act') will prevail over Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act , 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'SARFAESI Act'), the secure
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
