Search Results for "DRT powers"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Supreme Court Allows Appeal of Claimant in Motor Accident Case — Functional Di...
Supreme Court Modifies Sentence in Forgery Case Due to Long Pendency and No Crim...
Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Suit — Concurrent Findi...
High Court of Bombay at Bombay Dismisses Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Acc...

Search Results for "DRT powers"

131 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 131 result(s)

High Court

High Court Allows Writ Petitions by Bank and Auction Purchaser, Quashing DRT Order Setting Aside Auction Sale. DRT Exceeded Jurisdiction by Granting Final Relief in Interim Application Under Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, Despite Valid Auction Compliance with Rules.

24 Mar 2026

The dispute arose from an order passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal-III, Mumbai (DRT) setting aside an auction sale conducted by HDFC Bank Limited an...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Guarantors' Appeals in SARFAESI Act Enforcement Case, Upholding Sale of Mortgaged Properties. The Court held that multiple litigations by guarantors constitute abuse of process and cannot defeat the expeditious recovery mechanism under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

23 Sep 2021

The Supreme Court of India dealt with civil appeals arising from special leave petitions challenging a common judgment of the Madras High Court. The d...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging DRAT Order Setting Aside DRT's Reference to Arbitration in Bank Recovery Suit. Arbitration Clause Does Not Oust Jurisdiction of DRT Under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993.

8 Mar 2016

The petitioner, Harvestdeal Securities Ltd., challenged an order of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) dated 19 February 2015, which set asid...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging DRAT Order Setting Aside DRT's Reference to Arbitration in Bank Recovery Suit. Debt Recovery Tribunal Has Exclusive Jurisdiction Under RDDB Act, 1993, and Arbitration Clause Cannot Oust It.

8 Mar 2016

The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by Harvestdeal Securities Ltd. challenging an order of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRA...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging DRT Order in SARFAESI Act Matter — One Time Settlement Not Binding as Bank Did Not Accept Offer. Court Held That Mere Submission of OTS Proposal Does Not Create Binding Contract; Bank's Rejection Valid.

8 Jul 2024

The petitioners, borrowers of the respondent bank, challenged the order dated 22.09.2022 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Bangalore in Diary No...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging DRAT Order Upholding DRT's Refusal to Condon Delay in Filing Appeal Against Recovery Certificate. The court held that the petitioner failed to show sufficient cause for the delay of over 7 years in filing the appeal under Section 20(3) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993.

29 Aug 2012

The petitioner, Manilal Govindji Khona, a sole proprietor of Messrs. Prisiko Cotton Traders, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 10.4.20...

High Court

Bombay High Court Holds Arbitral Tribunal Cannot Appoint Court Receiver Under Section 17 of Arbitration Act. Court Receiver is an Officer of the High Court Subject Only to Chief Justice's Supervision.

16 Mar 2017

The Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay filed a Report seeking directions on whether the Registry should accept matters where an Arbitral Tribunal appo...

High Court

Bombay High Court Upholds DRAT Order Allowing One Time Settlement in Debt Recovery Case — Interest Must Be Calculated as Per OTS Terms. The court held that the DRT erred in not giving effect to the OTS and in calculating interest beyond the OTS terms, and the DRAT correctly set aside the DRT order.

10 Jul 2019

The petitioners, Small Industries Development Bank of India (SIDBI) and India SME Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd., challenged an order dated 26th Ma...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Prosecution Under Sections 420 and 471 IPC Following Settlement of Loan Account Approved by Debts Recovery Tribunal — Criminal proceedings cannot continue after compromise of civil debt where no element of cheating from inception exists.

1 Jan 2026

The case involves an appeal by Vijay Kumar Kela and his proprietary firm against an order of the Chhattisgarh High Court refusing to quash criminal pr...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petitions Challenging DRT Orders Under SARFAESI Act, Holding That Section 14 Orders Are Administrative and Not Subject to Appeal Under Section 18. The court clarified that the remedy against a Section 14 order lies only by way of writ petition under Article 226/227, and the DRT has no power to review or recall its own Section 14 order.

12 Dec 2025

The Bombay High Court dealt with a batch of writ petitions and interim applications challenging orders passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) unde...

1 2 3

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