Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Canara vs Dinesh

High Court Of Gujarat|10 July, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the action taken up by the secured creditor in terms of Section 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 [for short 'the Securitization Act'] is open to scrutiny and can not only be set aside, but even status-quo ante can also be restored by the Debts Recovery Tribunal and, even otherwise, against any action taken after S.13(4) measure, appeal is provided, which is a complete inbuilt mechanism under the Securitization Act and, therefore, the civil Court has erred in exercising jurisdiction and misinterpreted S.13(4) of the Securitization Act.
Hence, the matter deserves consideration.
Rule.
Interim relief in terms of paragraphs 21[b].
(ANANT S. DAVE, J.) (swamy) Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Canara vs Dinesh

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
10 July, 2012