Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act 2002 Section 1 - Judgment Search Results

Kanji Manji Kothari and Co. and Vs. Uco Bank

Court : DRAT Mumbai

Reported in : I(2008)BC91

..... charge presiding officer d r t i mumbai rejecting appeal application filed under section 17 of the securitisation and reconstruction of financial assets and enforcement of security interest act 2002 hereinafter referred to as the srfaesi act on the ground of limitation .....

Rama Steel Industries and anr. Vs. Shikshak Sahakari Bank Ltd.

Court : DRAT Mumbai

Reported in : I(2008)BC122

..... these appeals is whether the provisions of the securitisation and reconstruction of financial assets and enforcement of security interest act 2002 hereinafter referred to as the srfaesi act would be applicable to the co operative banks ..... 2003 issued under sub clause v of clause c of sub section 1 of section 2 of the srfaesi act the central government has specifically included a co operative bank as .....

Corporation Bank Vs. Ruia Cotex Ltd. and ors.

Court : DRAT Mumbai

Reported in : II(2006)BC250

..... debts by invoking the provisions of section 13 2 of the securitisation and reconstructions of financial assets and enforcement of security interest act 2002 hereinafter referred to as the securitisation act admittedly the bank had issued the ..... dated 14th august 2003 made by the learned presiding officer debts recovery tribunal 1 kolkata hereinafter referred to as the drt the respondent no 6 which .....

Nutan Warehousing Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Indian Bank

Court : DRAT Mumbai

Reported in : IV(2004)BC214

..... to the secured creditors including the respondent no 1 to proceed against the borrowers under clauses 2 and 4 of clause 13 of the securitisation and reconstruction of financial assets and enforcement of security interest second ordinance 2002 however they .....

Indian Bank Vs. Dena Bank and ors.

Court : DRAT Mumbai

Reported in : III(2006)BC65

sum of rs 13 34 53 308 78 with future interest at the rate of 18 25 per annum with quarterly sum of rs 13 34 53 308 78 with future interest at the rate of 18 25 per annum with quarterly sum of rs 13 34 53 308 78 with future interest at the rate of 18 25 per annum with quarterly sum of rs 13 34 53 308 78 with future interest at the rate of 18 25 per annum with quarterly sum of rs 13 34 53 308 78 with future interest at the rate of 18 25 per annum with quarterly sum of rs 13 34 53 308 78 with future interest at the rate of 18 25 per annum with quarterly sum of rs 13 34 53 308 78 with future interest at the rate of 18 25 per annum with quarterly being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 8th november 2002 passed by the learned presiding officer of the d r 1 this substantive appeal is filed by the appellants original defendant

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Daewoo Motors (i) Ltd. and ors.

Court : DRAT Mumbai

Reported in : IV(2005)BC163

the respondent 3 icici bank limited now m s asset reconstruction company i limited for short arcil being creditor had also the respondent 3 icici bank limited now m s asset reconstruction company i limited for short arcil being creditor had also claimants including the secured creditors like icici bank and other financial institutions however by his order dated 31 8 2004 the crore the respondent 3 icici bank limited now m s asset reconstruction company i limited for short arcil being creditor had tribunal mumbai for the recovery of their dues and for enforcement of their securities the said original application came to be had the first priority over the other claimants including the secured creditors like icici bank and other financial institutions however by office for serving them upon the respondents this is the interest of the customs department as far as that appeal is drt and its officers and subordinates from taking any further action pursuant to the public notice dated 16 3 2005 whereby debts recovery tribunal iii mumbai in original application no 162 2002 whereby the application of the customs department to intervene in other financial institutions against the daewoo motors the respondent no 1 m s daewoo motors limited had improved plant and machinery

Blue Blends (India) Ltd. and ors. Vs. Canara Bank and ors.

Court : DRAT Mumbai

Reported in : IV(2004)BC250

this cannot be done directing the defendants to disclose their assets is an oppressive order obviously order dated 7 2 2001 7 2 2001 which required the appellants to disclose their assets on affidavit when the appellant no 1 company namely m by this order the defendants were required to disclose their assets within two months time however thereafter immediately on 19 2 7 2 2001 which required the appellants to disclose their assets on affidavit when the appellant no 1 company namely m was not justified in directing the appellants to disclose their assets on oath when the appellant no 1 company was before 7 2 2001 which required the appellants to disclose their assets on affidavit when the appellant no 1 company namely m application but all the same insisted that affidavit disclosing their assets be filed and warned of taking action against them for affidavit disclosing their assets be filed and warned of taking action against them for non compliance of the said order 3 hence the following order is passed misc appeal no 273 2002 is hereby allowed the impugned order dated 4 6 2002 sica 1985 further proceedings therefore were stayed in view of section 22 1 of the sica it also appears that subsequently 1 this misc appeal is filed by the appellant original defendants

Bank of BahraIn and Kuwait B.S.C. Vs. G.S.L. (India) Ltd. and ors.

Court : DRAT Mumbai

sica the legal proceedings are suspended thereafter the bank or financial institution as the case may be approaches the bifr and sica the legal proceedings are suspended thereafter the bank or financial institution as the case may be approaches the bifr and sica the legal proceedings are suspended thereafter the bank or financial institution as the case may be approaches the bifr and sica the legal proceedings are suspended thereafter the bank or financial institution as the case may be approaches the bifr and no suit for the recovery of money or for the enforcement of any security against the industrial company or of any the recovery of money or for the enforcement of any security against the industrial company or of any guarantee in respect sica the legal proceedings are suspended thereafter the bank or financial institution as the case may be approaches the bifr and company or any other instrument having effect under the said act or other law no proceedings for the winding up of to be stayed until decision of the appeal no 306 2002 pending with aaifr it was this prayer which was allowed where in respect of an industrial company an inquiry under section 16 is pending or any scheme referred to under section was filed by the applicant bank against the defendant nos 1 and 6 during the pendency of the original application the

Bank of Maharashtra Vs. Ellora Steels Ltd. and ors.

Court : DRAT Mumbai

Reported in : III(2005)BC205

of the amount as due from the defendants and for enforcement of their securities 3 in response to the summons the of the amount as due from the defendants and for enforcement of their securities 3 in response to the summons the of the amount as due from the defendants and for enforcement of their securities 3 in response to the summons the of the amount as due from the defendants and for enforcement of their securities 3 in response to the summons the of the amount as due from the defendants and for enforcement of their securities 3 in response to the summons the the defendant no 1 with an intention to create the security thereon by way of joint equitable mortgage by deposit of 220 lacs rs 165 lacs rs 55 lacs rate of interest 19 75 p a with quarterly rests ii cc book of the contract act all these sections of the contract act deal with conditions under which the surety is discharged useful of the tribunal filed additional written statement on 6 2 2002 and came out with a new submission that he had guarantee he has agreed to waive all his rights under sections 133 134 135 139 and 141 of the contract act rs 60 lacs in the name of the defendant no 1 company also was sanctioned the defendant nos 3 and 5

Usha (India) Ltd. Vs. Sidbi and ors.

Court : DRAT Mumbai

Reported in : II(2005)BC5

no suit for the recovery of money or for the enforcement of any security against the industrial company or of any no suit for the recovery of money or for the enforcement of any security against the industrial company or of any no suit for the recovery of money or for the enforcement of any security against the industrial company or of any no suit for the recovery of money or for the enforcement of any security against the industrial company or of any no suit for the recovery of money or for the enforcement of any security against the industrial company or of any the recovery of money or for the enforcement of any security against the industrial company or of any guarantee in respect no suit for the recovery of money or for the enforcement of any security against the industrial company or of any also relevant provisions of the sick industrial companies special provisions act 1985 and in my view there is no infirmity in pune on exhibit no 49 in original application no 117 2002 by the impugned order the learned presiding officer rejected application bifr and hence they are logically entitled to protection under section 22 1 of the sick industrial companies special provisions act 1 this misc appeal is filed by appellant original defendant no