Baleshwar Dayal Jaiswal v. Bank of India and Ors., AIR 2015 SC 2881 | Corporate Debt Recovery Attorney in Delhi NCR | Corporate Debt Recovery Lawyer in Delhi NCR | DRT Lawyer in Delhi NCR
DRT Lawyer in Delhi | DRT Lawyer in Delhi NCR | DRT Lawyer in Noida | DRT Lawyer in Gurugram | Corporate Debt Recovery Lawyer in New Delhi | Corporate Debt Recovery Lawyer in India | Corporate Debt Recovery Lawyer in Delhi NCR | Corporate Debt Recovery Lawyer in Delhi | Corporate Debt Recovery Lawyer in Noida | Corporate Debt Recovery Lawyer in Gurugram | Corporate Debt Recovery Attorney in Delhi NCR | Corporate Debt Recovery Attorney in Delhi | Corporate Debt Recovery Attorney in Noida | Corporate Debt Recovery Attorney in Gurugram | Corporate Debt Recovery Attorney in New Delhi | Corporate Debt Recovery Attorney in India | Corporate Debt Recovery Legal Solutions in Delhi NCR | Corporate Debt Recovery Legal Services in Delhi NCR | Corporate Debt Recovery Legal Remedies in Delhi NCR | Corporate Debt Recovery Attorney in Delhi NCR | Corporate Debt Recovery Attorney in Delhi | Corporate Debt Recovery Attorney in Noida | Corporate Debt Recovery Attorney in Gurugram | Corporate Debt Recovery Attorney in New Delhi |
In this case, there were two petitions which had been clubbed together, and a specific question of law was answered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. The petitioners, who were the borrowers in this case had raised a contention before the Hon’ble Court that a certain provision in the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions (RDBFI) Act of 1993, had to be included with Section 18(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest (SARFAESI) Act of 2002. This provision of the RDBFI Act gave powers to the appellate tribunal to allow an appeal after the period of limitation had expired, if there was a sufficient cause of failure which had been stated by the parties. Further, Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act mentions the rules and guidelines to be followed while making an appeal to the appellate tribunal.
Issue: Whether Section 20(3) of the RDBFI Act is applicable and can be considered to be read along with Section 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, in the disposal of an appeal being undertaken by the appellate tribunal?
The Court came to the consensus that, by a bare perusal of Section 18(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, it was clear and could be made out that the Appellate Tribunal which had been constituted in accordance with the rules of the SARFAESI, had to dispose the appeals which came before it in accordance with the rules of the RDBFI Act. Furthermore, the court went on to suggest that a side-by-side reading of both the SARFAESI Act and the RDBFI Act, would enable one to find out the harmonious co-existence between both the acts. The Court also referred to the case of M/s. Travancore v. Union of India, Appeal (Civil) 3228 of 2006 in which the Court had supported and had upheld the view that the SARFAESI Act and the RDBFI Act are complimentary to each other.
Authored By: Adv. Anant Sharma & Abhijith Christopher