Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2005(3)ALD90; 2005(2)ALT266; 2005(2)ARBLR52(AP); III(2005)BC604; 133CompCas28(AP); 67SCL299(AP)
..... the complaint made by him to the banking ombudsman, was also rejected having regard to the fact that the bank had already issued notice under section 13(2) of the securitization act, calling upon the applicant to pay the dues, and that on failure to do so, the money would be recovered by effecting sale of the property, mortgaged at the time ..... wrongful debits made by the bank to his loan account, should be referred to an arbitrator. he, thus prayed that the arbitration application is maintainable under section 11 of the securitization act.10. a reading of the averments, as pleaded by the applicant in support of the arbitration application, and as set out supra, would disclose that the applicant has availed cash ..... the bank and his approach to the banking omudsman, who rejected the application. he further submitted that inasmuch as the bank has issued notice under section 13(2) of the securitization act for recovery of the loan dues, having regard to the provisions of section 11 thereof, which provides for resolution of disputes by way of arbitration, the disputes raised by the ..... for any bank or financial institution for the purposes of recovering the dues, is not entitled to invoke the provisions of section 11 of the securitization act, and consequently the provisions of section 11 of the arbitration act, to maintain the present arbitration application, for appointment of an arbitrator.17. for the foregoing reasons, the objections raised by the registry is upheld, holding .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR2007Kant9; 134CompCas456(Kar)
..... he approached this court by preferring a writ petition, the wisdom dawned upon him to seek to challenge the proceedings initiated by the appellant -bank under the provisions of the securitization act, it may be stated even at the cost of repetition that any person (including borrower) who is aggrieved by the measures taken by the secured creditor or his authorized officer ..... that was already filed before the debt recovery tribunal prior to the coming into force of the said proviso. that in the instant case, the steps were initiated under the securitization act as far back as on 16.8.2004 which is much prior to the insertion of the proviso and hence it has no application to an action which has already ..... further whether the same would constitute double jeopardy. thirdly whether the banks are obliged to withdraw the case filed before the debt recovery tribunal for invoking the provisions of the securitization act that in the instant case, the borrower has availed a huge financial assistance from the punjab national bank and when the outstanding loan amount reached 4.33 crores, an application ..... is not at all incumbent or obligatory upon the bank to withdraw the application already filed before the debt recovery tribunal in order to invoke the provisions of the securitization act. that apart, the said proviso to section 19(1) had been inserted w.e.f. 11.11.2004 and it would have a prospective effect and not a retrospective effect .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR2008Ori88; 106(2008)CLT324; 2008(I)OLR659
..... reported in (2005) 126 company cases 630 (madras). in that judgment also reliance was placed on the same principle that section 17 of the securitization act provides for a remedy before the debts recovery tribunal. in that judgment an observation was also made that the writ court should not interfere on mere ..... of the learned single judge to the effect that the writ petitions are not maintainable, as there is an alternative remedy under section 17 of the securitization act.18. learned counsel also placed reliance on a division bench judgment of the madras high court in the case of digivislon electronics ltd. v. ..... 10.11.2003 issued by the central government notifying it to be a financial institution, it can initiate such proceeding under section 13 of the securitization act in respect of those two loan agreements of 2001 and 2002.9. this question has been answered by the statute itself. section 13(1) ..... have been notified in exercise of powers conferred under sub-clause (iv) of clause (m) of sub-section (1) of section 2 of the securitization act. in the said notification maharshi housing development finance corporation ltd., new delhi has been notified as a financial institution on and from 10th november, 2003. ..... on the other hand it is submitted on behalf of opposite party nos. 6 and 7 that the notice under section 13(4) of the securitization act has been given to the petitioner. on perusal of the purported notice dated 1.10.2005, this court does not find that any separate notice .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2008)2PLR286
..... % of the value of the amount outstanding against the financial assets disbursed to the petitioner by the respondent-corporations and once the respondents have initiated action under the provisions of securitization act, the proceedings before the bifr are deemed to have abated. the reliance of sh. i.s. ratta, counsel for the petitioner in rishab agro industries ltd. v. pnb capital ..... the amount outstanding against the financial assets disbursed to the petitioner. it has been further argued that the writ petition for quashing the notice under section 13(2) of the securitization act is not maintainable as the same does not give any right to the petitioner to file the present writ petition. moreover, the respondent-corporation cannot be injuncted from resorting to ..... a period of one week on the receipt of objection and, therefore, the respondents are further precluded from taking any action against the petitioner under section 13(4) of the securitization act.4. in support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment cited as rishab agro industries ltd. v. pnb capital services ltd. 2001 (banking) ..... stated that in case the petitioner failed to repay the entire outstanding dues, the corporation shall be entitled to exercise its rights as provided under section 13(4) of the securitization act. the petitioner vide annexure p-13 dated 2.3.2007 filed objections to the notice dated 9.1.2007 issued by the respondent-corporation under section 13(2) of the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2008(4)BomCR719
..... special provisions, the remedies already available are not at all taken away.as rightly pointed out by learned government pleader shri khandare, overriding effect given to the provisions of the securitization act, is not in an unbridled manner, when the provision regarding overriding effect begins with non-obstante clause, 'notwithstanding anything contained in any other law...'. from reading section 35 ..... evident that even section 37 does not create any bar to the applicability of the provisions of other statutes. on the contrary, it clarifies that the provisions of the securitization act and rules thereunder shall be in addition to the provisions of any other law for the time being in force. the section, therefore, is required to be believed, ..... because it was addressed to the then liquidator. at the cost of repetition, we may reproduce the definition of borrower as contained in section 2(1)(f) of the securitization act:(f). 'borrower' means any person who has been granted financial assistance by any bank or financial institution or who has given any guarantee or created any mortgage or pledge ..... creditor. 24. no. 7 : whether alienation/transfer of 'security assets' without consent of 'secured creditor' msc bank, is barred by section 13(13) of the securatization act ?section 13 of the securitization act speaks about enforcement of security interest and secured creditor is granted a right to enforce the security interest without the intervention of the court. section 13(2) requires .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR2009Guj98; (2009)3GLR1934
..... illusory. delhi high court in r.v. saxena's case (supra) also upheld the validity of second proviso to section 18(1) of the securitization act with which we fully concur.6. we have also not come across any provision in the statute, enabling the secured creditor to adjust or appropriate the ..... seek refund of the amount deposited and therefore, he is not in any way aggrieved. further the third proviso to section 18(1) of the securitization act also enables the appellate tribunal, for the reasons to be recorded in writing, reduce the amount to not less than 25% of the debt referred ..... for either side at great length and we find unable to accept the arguments of the petitioner that second proviso to section 18(1) of the securitization act has effect of creating a discrimination, and it is offensive to the principle of equality enshrined under article 14 of the constitution of india. for ..... the legislature can impose conditions under which such a right is to be exercised. further learned counsel submitted that second proviso to section 18 of the securitization act does not require that entire debt amount to be deposited, and only 50% thereof, which can in a given case be further reduced to a ..... of the apex court in mardia chemicals ltd. v. union of india : air 2004 sc 2371 and submitted that when proviso to section 17 of securitization act was challenged the apex court took the view that such a condition is onerous and unreasonable and violative of article 14 of the constitution of india. .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2007(3)AWC2509
..... and 7 are doing the business without payment of any amount to the petitioner. in the case of canara bank while interpreting the provision of the securitization act it has been held that the magistrate is expected to take such steps was in his opinion, are necessary for the purpose of taking possession ..... of the writ petition, which has been admitted by the respondent no. 7 in para 34 of their counter affidavit.8. the securitization act does not permit respondents no. 3 to 5 to adjudicate any dispute of any nature between the bank and its borrower or to declare any action ..... under the securitization act to be bad or in any manner restrain the bank in exercising its right under the act for the purpose of dispute which may also include a third party. the act contemplates a remedy in the form of an appeal to ..... , did not make the payment. compelled with the aforesaid circumstances a notice under section 13 of the securitization and reconstruction of financial assets and enforcement of security interest act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the act of 2002) was issued to respondent no. 7 on 11.6.2004. even after the receipt of ..... 6 and 7 has submitted that respondents no. 6 and 7 are the sister concerns with separate entities. act no. 54 of 2002 has been enacted by the parliament to regulate the securitization and reconstruction of financial assets and enforcement of security interest and for the matter enacted therein an incidental thereto .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2008)3PLR142
..... bank has rejected the case of the applicant/appellants without any legal right or authority;(ii) issue a direction quashing all the proceedings of the bank being conducted under the securitization act.(iii) issue a direction to the respondents to accept the 'one time settlement' proposed and amount offered by the applicant/appellant and settle the whole loan case of the ..... the reserve bank of india and further restraining the respondents not to create any kind of lien over the property of the company for sale under the provisions of the securitization act.2. the petitioner-company availed of certain loan and credit facilities from the respondent-bank. as it failed to meet its financial obligation of repayment as per the agreement, ..... before the debt recovery tribunal. during the pendency of the o.a., the bank also initiated action under the securitization act. the petitioner moved s.a. no. 2/2007 under section 17 of the act before the debt recovery tribunal under the securitization act being aggrieved by the action of the respondent-bank. during the pendency of the said proceedings, the bank published ..... the matter by accepting rs. 4.75 crores and to stay all the proceedings conducted by the respondent-bank under the securitization and reconstruction of financial assets and enforcement of security interest act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the 'securitisation act') has been rejected; with a further prayer for the issuance of a direction to the respondent-bank to comply with the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Gujarat
Reported in : AIR2010Guj35
..... creditor take recourse to that provision at any time at his sweet will and pleasure? in our view, it depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case.10. securitization act was enacted to regulate securitisation and reconstruction of financial assets and for enforcement of security interest and to enable the banks and financial institutions to realize long-term assets, manage ..... secured creditor. these facts would clearly indicate that secured creditor had shown indulgence to the borrower to pay and to satisfy his liabilities after initiation of proceedings under the securitization act, but that opportunity was not availed of by the borrower. under these circumstances, secured creditor took recourse to sub-section (4) of section 13 of the ..... 17 of the agenda of board meeting reads as follows:to take on record the notice received by the company under chapter - iii of 'the securitization and reconstruction of financial assets and enforcement of security interest act 2002 from ifci' and to take appropriate decision thereon.... the company is in a process of replying to this notice. since the company has submitted ..... .1. the question that is posed for consideration of this court is whether notice issued under sub-section (2) of section 13 of the securitization and reconstruction of financial assets and enforcement of security act, 2002 (for brevity 'the act') would lose its efficacy, if the secured creditor commits delay in taking recourse to sub-section (4) of section 13 of the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(5)ALD113; 2007(6)ALT383
..... secured asset. but the petitioner requested.time for one week on the ground that he filed writ petition. as per section 34 of the securitization act, civil court is having no jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceedings and the petitioner has to approach the debts recovery tribunal. the ..... 8-2005 and enaadu daily newspaper dated 12-8-2005. the respondent no. 2 filed cr1. m.p. no. 140/2006 of the securitization act before the chief metropolitan magistrate, cyberabad seeking assistance and chief metropolitan magistrate was pleased to appoint an advocate-commissioner vide his orders dated 20- ..... the amount, the 3rd respondent was constrained to classify the account as non-performing asset and it invoked the provisions of securitization act, 2002 and further approached the chief metropolitan magistrate for appointment of advocate commissioner to take possession of the suit schedule property and since ..... was constrained to classify the account as non-performing asset and it invoked the provisions of securitization act, 2002 and issued demand notice on 10-3-2005 under section 13(2) of the act demanding the payment of rs.21,19,355/-together with future interest. but the said notice ..... also incidentally touched the merits and demerits of the matter and had referred to certain documents and the relevant provisions of the indian contract act in relation thereto. the learned counsel also placed strong reliance on certain decisions to substantiate her contentions.5. heard the counsel.6. the .....Tag this Judgment!