Search Results for "DRT Procedure Rules"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Issues Notice in Service Matter Challenging Deletion of Names ...
High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeals Against Ex Parte Interim Injunction in Pr...
High Court of Karnataka Allows Revision Petition in Private Complaint Case — T...
High Court of Karnataka Allows Revision Petition in Private Complaint Case — T...

Search Results for "DRT Procedure Rules"

132 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 132 result(s)

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Borrowers' Challenge Against DRT Orders Rejecting Interim Relief Despite Pending IBC Section 95 Petition. Interim Moratorium Under Section 96 IBC Bars Continuation of Securitisation Proceedings During Pendency of Insolvency Petition.

21 Apr 2026

The petitioners, M/s. Kapole Advertising Agency and others, were the original borrowers who had approached the Bombay High Court challenging two order...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal Against Injunction Restraining Bank from Enforcing Corporate Guarantee. The court set aside the injunction as the guarantee deed was unconditional and the bank had a prima facie case under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC, enabling it to proceed under SARFAESI Act and IBC.

17 Feb 2026

The appeal arose from an order dated 25.07.2024 passed by the LXXXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (Commercial Court) in I.A. No....

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Appeal of Auction Purchaser in SARFAESI Act Case — High Court Erred in Entertaining Writ Petition Despite Alternative Remedy. Restoration of Securitization Application After Full Payment and Sale Certificate Issuance Held Improper.

10 Apr 2024

The appeal arises from an order of the Division Bench of the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad, which set aside the DRT's order dismi...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order for Release of Secured Asset on Partial Payment Under SARFAESI Act. The court held that Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 requires full payment of dues for redemption, and partial payment does not entitle the borrower to reclaim the property.

10 Feb 2022

The dispute arose between a bank, as secured creditor, and a borrower over the enforcement of security interest under the Securitisation and Reconstru...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeal Against Rejection of Plaint in SARFAESI Act Case — Civil Suit Not Barred Under Section 34 When Challenge is to Mortgage Validity and Bank's Actions, Not Recovery Proceedings. The court held that the bar under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act does not apply to a suit seeking declaration of title and challenging the validity of a mortgage, as such issues are not within the jurisdiction of the Debt Recovery Tribunal.

16 Jul 2021

The appellant, Smt. Nanjamma, filed a civil suit (O.S.No.3780/2017) before the XXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, seeking a dec...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses MSFC's Petition Challenging DRAT Order Granting Cross-Examination in Loan Recovery Case. Right to Cross-Examine Affidavit Deponent Is a Valuable Right Not Barred by Rule 12(6) of DRT Procedure Rules.

2 Apr 2016

The petitioner, Maharashtra State Financial Corporation (MSFC), filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challeng...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Possession Notice Under SARFAESI Act — Guarantor's Challenge to Assignment of Debt and Validity of Notice Rejected. Assignment of debt by Bank of Baroda to securitisation company held valid under Section 5 of SARFAESI Act, and possession notice served by registered post complied with Rule 8(1) of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002.

16 Aug 2012

The petitioner, Tushar P. Shah, a director and guarantor of respondent no. 2 (M/s. Air Coils Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd.), filed a writ petition chall...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Challenge to DRT Presiding Officer's Appointment in Debt Recovery Case — Petitioner Failed to Establish Lack of Qualification Under Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. Appointment of Presiding Officer with Judicial Experience as District Judge Upheld as Valid Under Section 5 of the Act.

31 Aug 2010

The petitioner, Tiger Jewellery India Private Limited, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the appointmen...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petitions Against DRT Orders Due to Availability of Alternative Remedy Under Section 20 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. Petitioner's challenge to DRT's decision to hear main case after dismissing interlocutory applications fails as review remedy was exhausted and appeal remedy remains available.

12 Dec 2005

The petitioner, Gangaram Biseshwar Agrawal, was defendant No. 2 in three recovery suits filed by Canara Bank, Union Bank of India, and State Bank of I...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petitions Challenging DRT Orders Under SARFAESI Act — Petitioner Failed to Show Jurisdictional Error or Violation of Natural Justice. The court held that the petitioner had an alternative remedy of appeal under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, and no exceptional grounds were made out for interference under Article 226.

30 Nov -0001

The petitioner, Phoenix ARC Private Limited, a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, acting as a trust, filed two writ petitions under Art...

1 2 3 4

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)