Search Results for "asset sale"

711 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 711 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Bank's Appeal in SARFAESI Auction Dispute — Extension of Time Not Binding Without Confirmation Letter. Forfeiture of Earnest Money Upheld Under Rule 9(5) of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002.

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by the State Bank of India (the Bank) against the judgment of the Madras High Court. The dispute arose from...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Bank's Appeal Against Confiscation Orders Under Central Excise Act and SARFAESI Act. Commissioner's Use of Omitted Rule 173Q(2) Invalid and SARFAESI Act Grants Priority to Secured Creditors Over Excise Dues.

The appeal arose from a judgment of the Allahabad High Court dismissing a writ petition filed by Punjab National Bank. The bank had extended credit fa...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Executing Court's Rejection of Time-Barred Application to Set Aside Auction Sale Under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC. Application Filed 63 Days After Sale Found Barred by Limitation, Secured Creditor's Prior Charge on Property Upheld for Distribution of Sale Proceeds.

The petitioner, a borrower, had availed a housing loan from respondent No.1 finance company and mortgaged the purchased flat. Upon default, the lender...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Dismissal of Complaint Under Section 203 CrPC — No Sufficient Grounds for Process Found After Police Investigation Under Section 202 CrPC.

The petitioner, Milind Kashinath Mahadik, filed a complaint in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class at Pune against respondent nos. 2, 3, and ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitions Challenging AAIFR Order Rejecting Revival Scheme for Sick Company Under SICA. The court held that the AAIFR's findings on non-compliance and lack of feasibility were based on evidence and not perverse, thus no interference under Article 226 was warranted.

This group of writ petitions challenges a common order dated 28/5/2010 passed by the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (...