Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“Section 94 of IBC gives remedy to “debtor’ only to either apply personally or through a Resolution Professional to the Adjudicating Authority for initiating the insolvency resolution process.”
The grievance of the petitioner Bank is that notwithstanding the favourable order dated 29-06-2022, the adverse remarks recorded in the order dated 04-06-2022 continue to cause irreparable harm to the petitioner Bank’s reputation and interests.
“‘Henderson Principle’ is a core component of the broader doctrine of abuse of process, aimed at enthusing in the parties a sense of sanctity towards judicial adjudications and determinations. It ensures that litigants are not subjected to repetitive and vexatious legal challenges. This rule not only supports the finality of judgments but also underscores the ideals of judicial propriety and fairness.”
‘The rule of amendment has been termed as rule of justice, equity, and good conscience which needs to be exercised in the larger interest of doing full and complete justice to parties before the Court.’
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 34 and 37 — Interference with award by Court: Law regarding limited jurisdiction of Court
MP High Court held that the writ petition is maintainable due to the pure legal questions involved regarding the applicability of SARFAESI Act provisions to HFCs for amounts below the Rs. 20 Lakhs threshold.
by Prashant Tripathi† and Hrishitha Velore††
Reserve Bank of India issues Master Direction to ensure prudent and efficient functioning of Asset Reconstruction Companies
by Abhishek Saini†
Any dilution of the forfeiture provided under Rule 9(5) of SARFAESI Rules would result in entire auction process under SARFAESI Act being disregarded by mischievous auction purchasers through sham bids, thereby undermining the overall object of the Act of promoting financial stability, reducing NPAs and fostering a more efficient and streamlined mechanism for recovery of bad debts.
Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas advises UV Asset Reconstruction Company Limited (“UV”) in enforcement of security interest against Burnpur Cement Limited (“BCL”) in its
The Court is unable to accept that the legislative intent is to provide parallel regimes for the recovery of debts. The provisions of Section 13(10) of the SARFAESI Act, thus, cannot be interpreted in the manner as contended on behalf of the petitioner.
by Prashant Tripathi†
by Govinda Asawa† and Pranay Agarwal††
The respondents in the instant matter constituted the borrower, guarantor and the bank (secured creditor), while the appellants were the auction purchasers.
“The scope of writ jurisdiction cannot be allowed to trounce the statutory obligation, on the stratagem of efficacious alternate remedy.”
The right to recovery of the Banks and Financial Institutions if pitted against the constitutional right of life of a person to live with dignity and not to be deprived of without following the established procedure of law, the constitutional rights of the person shall prevail.
by Prashant Tripathi†