AI Overview...
-
Appeal under Section 17 of SARFAESI Act - Any person, including the borrower, aggrieved by measures under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, has a remedy through an appeal under Section 17. This includes orders related to possession and sale of property. Once an order is passed, such as a possession order, the aggrieved party can challenge it via Section 17 appeal. For instance, in Elogic Technologies Private Limited VS Authorised Officer, M/S Fullerton India Credit Company Limited - Karnataka, the sale has already taken place, but the borrower or affected party may still seek remedy through Section 17 if aggrieved by the measures taken.
-
DRT Orders and Finality - Orders passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), such as dismissal of Section 17 applications, attain finality and are subject to appeal or writ petitions. For example, in Balkishan Boob S/O Late Jaikishan Boob VS Bank Of Maharashtra, Bangalore Zonal Office, Bengaluru - Karnataka and MR BALKISHAN BOOB Vs BANK OF MAHARASHTRA - Karnataka, the dismissal of Section 17 applications by DRT has been upheld, and further appeals or writ petitions are filed but may not survive if the order has attained finality.
-
Interlocutory Applications and Additional Relief - Petitioners often seek interlocutory reliefs, such as releasing personal guarantees or adding prayers, which are considered during the main appeal or writ petitions. In MR. B ARVIND KUMAR Vs INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK - Karnataka, the petitioner sought additional reliefs via interlocutory application, which are considered alongside the main challenge.
-
Legal Limitations and Applicability - The SARFAESI Act does not apply to agricultural land or cases with loans below a certain threshold, as clarified in Easun Holdings Private Limit vs Standard Chartered Bank - Madras. The Act's provisions are limited to certain types of security interests, and appeals or objections related to agricultural land may fall outside its scope.
Analysis and Conclusion: Appeals against DRT orders in interlocutory applications under SARFAESI are governed primarily by Section 17, which provides an effective remedy for aggrieved parties, including borrowers and other stakeholders. Orders passed by DRT, including those dismissing Section 17 applications, are subject to appeal or writ petitions, but their finality depends on whether they are challenged within the prescribed timelines. Interlocutory applications are considered during these proceedings, and additional reliefs may be sought. However, the applicability of SARFAESI to agricultural land or low-value loans is limited, impacting the scope of appeal and remedy options (Elogic Technologies Private Limited VS Authorised Officer, M/S Fullerton India Credit Company Limited - Karnataka, Balkishan Boob S/O Late Jaikishan Boob VS Bank Of Maharashtra, Bangalore Zonal Office, Bengaluru - Karnataka, MR BALKISHAN BOOB Vs BANK OF MAHARASHTRA - Karnataka, Easun Holdings Private Limit vs Standard Chartered Bank - Madras).
Search Results for "Appeal against Order of Drt in Nterlocutary Application in Sarfaesi Application"
2021 0 Supreme(Kar) 646 • India - Karnataka
P.S.DINESH KUMAR
by way of appeal under Section 17 of the Act. ... Any person, including the borrower aggrieved by any measure referred in Sub-section (4) of Section 13 of SARFAESI Act has a remedy ... Second respondent obtained an order to take possession of property - Held, Admittedly, sale has taken place. ... Any person, including the borrower aggrieved by any measure referred in Sub-section (4) of Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act has a remedy by way of appeal under Section 17 of the Act. ... No.499/2018, under Sectio....
2021 0 Supreme(Kar) 152 • India - Karnataka
P.S.DINESH KUMAR
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - ARTICLE 226 - SARFAESI Act, 2002 - Section 17(1) - Mortgaged property - Borrowed ... The Company challenged the Possession Notice by filing an application under Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and it has been dismissed by the DRT vide order dated November 18, 2019. The said order has attained finality. 5. ... In view of disposal of this petition, all pending interlocutary applications do not survive for consideration a....
• India - High Court of Karnataka
P.S.DINESH KUMAR
The Company challenged the Possession Notice by filing an application under Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and it has been dismissed by the DRT vide order dated November 18, 2019. The said order has attained finality. ... Upon its dismissal, Company has filed a writ appeal. Parallely, petitioner has filed this writ petition. Shri. Reddy urged that there is no reference to the writ petition and writ appeal filed by the Borrower - Company in this petition and t....
• India - High Court of Karnataka
Petitioners have filed an interlocutary application I.A. No.2/2020 seeking to add prayer No.5 for a direction against the respondent - Bank to release personal guarantees of petitioners. ... 5 AIR 1990 Mad 115 6 Civil Appeal No.610-612 of 2004. ... On November 22, 2017, Bank issued notice under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act demanding Rs.3.72 Crores. ... On April 17, 2018, respondent - Bank issued notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act and a Sale notice was issued. On Sept....
2019 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 13981 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Hon`ble Mr Justice M. SATHYANARAYANAN
The DRT rejected the objection of the debtor that the land was agricultural. In appeal, the DRAT reversed that finding. ... an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal. ... Thus, it is manifest that the legislation, ie., SARFAESI Act will have no application to the security interest created in agricultural land and loans not exceeding rupees one lakh and cases where eighty percent of the loans are repaid by the borrower. 13. ... On a bare perusal of the object read with the relevant provisions, as aforestated, ....
Filter by Legal Phrase
