Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act 2002 Section 5 Acquisition Of Rights Or Interest In Financial Assets - Judgment Search Results

JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Mahar ...

Court: Mumbai

to exercise their rights to enforce their security under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest their rights to enforce their security under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, us. Any reference to the Petitioner hereinafter, shall mean JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Co. Pvt. Ltd. and/or Bank of India, as date of auction as 20th June, 2013 of all the assets of Respondent No.4 of which possession had been taken by under the provisions of SARFAESI Act and more particularly for enforcement of its security under Section 13 thereof. This would clearly the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882), any security interest created in favour of any secured creditor may be in the consortium. Thereafter, the debt, (alongwith the underlying security interest) owed by Respondent No.4 to Bank of India, was assigned are in addition and not in derogation of the Companies Act, 1956; Securities Contract (Regulation) Act, 1956; the Securities and Exchange Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 does not include the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, adopting proceedings either before this Court or the DRT under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. Now, the order passed by Supreme Court was whether on a true construction of Section 5 of the Act, execution of the ex-parte decree obtained by on the same field and both laws deal with the rights of dismissed workman or employee. But these two laws are

Eskays Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Soma Papers and Industries Ltd. and ...

Court: Mumbai

auction conducted by Respondent Nos.2 to 5, and since the Securitisation Application No.17 of 2007 was pending before the DRT, the waiver of deposit under section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and financial institutions, and unlike international banks, the banks and financial institutions in India did not have the power to take 30 days for sale of the movable and immovable secured assets of the borrower has to be served upon the borrower 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, the SARFAESI Act dated 16 August, 2016. It is called the Enforcement of Security Interest and Recovery of Debts Laws and Miscellaneous Provisions (Amendment) Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, the SARFAESI Act ). By the under the provisions of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (for short, the SICA, 1985 ). Despite the aforesaid, Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, the SARFAESI Act ). By the order dated 2009 the DRAT granted a complete waiver of deposit under section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and of which were mortgaged / charged with Respondent Nos.2 to 5. Thereafter, Respondent No.1 by its letter dated 30 April, 2007 the benefit of the borrower, he could lawfully waive the rights granted to him under the said Rules. These provisions neither

Somnath Manocha Vs. Punjab and Sind Bank and ors.

Court: Delhi

& Sind Bank (‘Bank’) under Section 13 (2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Bank (‘Bank’) under Section 13 (2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 under Section 13 (2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (‘SARFAESI Act’) been made by the lender in respect of the financial assets within the period of limitation prescribed under the LA. Section (2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (‘SARFAESI Act’) and consequent possession 13 (4) SARFAESI Act read with Rule 9 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002. Thereafter, the present writ petition was Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (‘SARFAESI Act’) and consequent possession notice under Section is therefore, apparent that the remedy provided under the SARFAESI Act to a secured creditor for recovery of a debt owing SARFAESI Act itself came into force only on 18th December 2002, the legislative intent was that even the sum owned to of learned counsel for the Petitioner that the notice under Section 13 (2) and the possession notice under Section 13 (4) Junagadh Vibhagyiya Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd. (2006) 129 Comp Cas 528 (Guj).10. In the present case, the Bank had made a (4) thereof, the secured creditor is entitled to exercise its rights in respect of the mortgaged property by taking over possession

M/s. National Laminate Corporation and Another Vs. Euro Merchandise (I ...

Court: Mumbai

Petitioners are challenging an order under section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest the . (name of the institution) under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (viii) the borrower has not made any repayment of the financial assistance in spite of the above notice and the Authorised by the secured creditor or if any of the secured assets is required to be sold or transferred by the secured institution) under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (54 of 2002) and in conferred under Section 13(12) read with Rule 9 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 issued a demand notice dated . under Section 13(12) read with Rule 9 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 issued a demand notice dated . Calling asset under sub-section (6) of Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act, unless it has been effected after the secured creditor has Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (54 of 2002) and in exercise of powers conferred under tribunals. .. 25. The opening words of sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act make it clear that where claims to be a partner of Petitioner No. 1 firm. 5. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to this Writ Petition are one thing to say in absence of the agreement, that rights of parties would be regulated by law in the same

Indian Bank Vs. Commercial Tax Officer and ors.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (2008)18VST562(Mad)

view, there is no conflict in Section 35 of the Securitisation Act and Section 24 of the TNGST Act. There is , Transcore v. Union of India : AIR2007SC712 , Asset Reconstruction Co. (India) Limited rep. by its Vice President v. Official is an Act to regulate the securitisation and reconstruction of financial assets and enforcement of security interest. The learned Special Government DRT, after the implementation of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, 'SARFAESI learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that as far as enforcement of security interest is concerned the SARFAESI Act is a and 114/5 situated at Manthangal village, Ranipet Town as its security by availing equitable mortgage apart from the hypothecation of plant the Transfer of Property Act as a transfer of an interest in specific immovable property for the purpose of securing the the bank is clearly unauthorised.50. Section 26(1) of the TNGST Act provides for an additional mode of recovery apart from the the DRT Act by the enactment of the NPA Act, 2002...22. On reading Section 13(2), which is the heart of the year 1991-92 has become charge which has priority. As per Section 24(2) of the TNGST Act arrears could be recovered:(a) as sale in the Gazette even as early as on January 5, 2007, the bank has proceeded under Section 13 of the shall be entitled to exercise all or any of the rights given in Section 13(4). On reading Section 13(2) it is

Messrs. Keystone Constructions and Others Vs. State Bank of India and ...

Court: Mumbai

be taken. 6(A). On 26th March, 2013, the petitioners filed Securitisation Application No.152 of 2013 under section 17 of the said any bank or financial institutions, or (ii) securitisation company or reconstruction company, whether acting as such or managing a trust set who has been granted financial assistance by any bank or financial institution or who has given any guarantee or created any creditors would be able to take possession of the mortgaged assets which is against the very intent of Section 13 of 18(1) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the behalf of a bank or financial institution, in whose favour security interest is created for due repayment by any borrower of respondents' claim was in excess of Rs.17.18 crores together with interest. The petitioners challenged this order before the DRAT, which held out the provisions of the SARFAESI Act and the DRT Act relevant to the additional submissions. 34(A). Sections 2(f), 2(ha) and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the "SARFAESI Act" or the "said therefore, a "borrower" within the meaning of that term in section 18. 36. A mortgagor falls within the ambit of the provisions of Section 18 of the Securitisation Act contemplates that 50% or 25% of the amount has to be deposited by borrower of a securitisation company or reconstruction company consequent upon acquisition by it of any rights or interest of any bank when the trial court has completed its adjudication of the rights of the parties in the action. Thomas Van Dyken Joint

A.L. Shah Vs. The Authorised Officer, State Bank of Hyderabad and Othe ...

Court: Chennai

subject property, filed three applications under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest a person who becomes borrower of a securitisation company or reconstruction company consequent upon acquisition by it of any rights or it of any rights or interest of any bank or financial institution in relation to such financial assistance; ? 16. Section secured debt, namely: ” (a) take possession of the secured assets of the borrower including the right to transfer by way 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short SARFAESI Act ?), given any guarantee or created any mortgage or pledge as security for the financial assistance granted by any bank or financial company consequent upon acquisition by it of any rights or interest of any bank or financial institution in relation to such such financial assistance; ? 16. Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act reads as under: (4) In case the borrower fails to not under Rule 13(2)(1)(e) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 (for short Rules 2002 ?). Accordingly, the appeals were returned other person who may be affected by action taken under Section 13(4) of the Securitisation Act. Reference may be made to the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai (for short DRAT ?) 5. An office objection was raised to the payment of court borrower of a securitisation company or reconstruction company consequent upon acquisition by it of any rights or interest of any bank or reconstruction company consequent upon acquisition by it of any rights or interest of any bank or financial institution in relation

Kambala Venkanna Naidu Vs. the Andhra Bank, Rep.by Its Authorised

Court: Andhra Pradesh

short question of considerable significance in the enforcement of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest of considerable significance in the enforcement of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 in Section 2 (zd) as to mean any bank or financial institution or any consortium or group of banks or financial in the enforcement of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereafter, the SARFAESI V.V.S.Rao) 1. A short question of considerable significance in the enforcement of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereafter, the SARFAESI Act or the Act), any instalment thereof, the secured creditor can enforce the secured interest notwithstanding anything contained in Section 69 or Section 69A of that a curable defect in the administrative decision or administrative action is not a ground to interfere in exercise of power Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereafter, the SARFAESI Act or the Act), would arise for with costs. 7. The term "secured creditor" is defined in Section 2 (zd) as to mean any bank or financial institution documents. For ready reference, we excerpt below paragraphs 4 and 5 from the counter affidavit of the second respondent. 5. In or affairs of the secured creditor empowered to exercise the rights of the secured creditor under the SARFAESI Act. As per

Nagrik Sahkari Bank Maryadit Vs. State of M.P.

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Andhyarujina. Both the committees suggested enactment of new legislation for securitisation and empowering the banks and financial institutions to take possession of the assets without intervention of the court and for reconstruction of assets. It is thus to be seen that the to test the legitimacy of such a measure relating to financial policy. 12. From the object of the SARFAESI Act and assets without intervention of the court and for reconstruction of assets. It is thus to be seen that the question of 35 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the "SARFAESI Act"), Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the "SARFAESI Act"), the namely, the Defence of India Act and the Motor Vehicles Act and on that basis also it was held that the bank issued notice under Section 13(2) of the Act of 2002 in regard to recovery of an amount of 1,50,317/-. Notice of the statute-maker, provided by such context, its scheme, the sections, clauses, phrases and words may take colour and appear different over the provisions of Section 35 of the SARFAESI Act. 5. First of all we would like to consider the question respondent No. 3 has contended that the Writ Court has rightly dismissed the petition on the ground of alternative remedy. Learned

Hemalatha Ranganathan Vs. the Authorised Officer Indian Bank Circle Of ...

Court: Chennai

learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 Egmore, under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to (4) of Section 13 taken by the secured creditor for enforcement of security were in accordance with the provisions of the and the Rules made thereunder. "(a) Rule 9(2) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules 2002 provides that the sale shall be in that manner in the interest of justice and public interest. 39.) As rightly observed by the Full Bench of the urgency and need to invoke Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, without taking independent action to take possession. 44. The Magistrate thereunder. "(a) Rule 9(2) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules 2002 provides that the sale shall be confirmed in favour of property by approaching the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and 600113. 4. S.Kanan - Tender submitted without any details (disqualified). 5. B.Subramani - 20/62, North Mada Street, Padi, Chennai 600 050. is clear that the Authorised Officer has not reserved any right to extend the time limit for deposit of balance 75%