Challenge Under Section 17 Of The SARFAESI Act Against Action Taken By Secured Creditor, Would Not Bar Arbitration Proceedings: Delhi High Court

Case: Hero Fincorp. Limited versus Techno Trexim (I) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Coram: Justice V. Kameswar Rao

Case No.: ARB.P. 1105/2021

Court Observation: “I find that even the Supreme Court in the case of Vidya Droliya (supra) in paragraph 35 while referring to M.D. Frozen Foods Exports Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. (supra) held that even prior arbitration proceedings are not a bar to proceedings under the NPA Act (SARFAESI Act) as it sets out an expeditious procedural methodology enabling the financial institutions to take possession and sell acquired properties for non-payment of dues, as such powers obviously cannot be exercised through arbitral proceedings”

Previous Posts

No Intention To Harm Reputation: Calcutta High Court Quashes Defamation Case Against Reporter & Editor Of A Bengali Daily

Family Court Can Restore Application U/S 125 CrPC After Its Dismissal For Default: Orissa High Court

Income Tax Act does not impose any limitation for filing an application for condonation of delay: Kerala High Court

Child Born From Second Wife Of A Deceased Employee Eligible For Compassionate Appointment: Rajasthan High Court

‘Discretion’ Has No Place In Contractual Matters Unless It Is Expressely Incorporated In Contract: Supreme Court

S.134 Evidence Act | Testimony Of Single Eyewitness Can Form Basis For Conviction Provided It Is Of Sterling Quality: Madhya Pradesh High Court

Doctrine Of Group Of Companies, Can’t Implead Third Party To Arbitration: Delhi High Court

Keywords

Section 17 Of The SARFAESI Act