TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court clarifies no appeal/revision against Securitisation Act orders. Revision Petition rejected, seek relief via legal avenues.</h1> <h3>M/s Kaveri Marketing Versus The Saraswat Co Operative Bank Ltd</h3> The Court held that the Revision Petition challenging the order under Section 14 of the Securitisation Act was not maintainable under Section 397 of the ... - Issues involved: Challenge to the order dated 21.11.2012 in Criminal Misc. No.5936/2012 under Section 397 r/w Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.Issue I: Maintainability of Revision PetitionThe petitioner challenges the order dated 21.11.2012 in Criminal Misc. No.5936/2012 under Section 397 r/w Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Registry raised an objection regarding the maintainability of the Revision Petition. The petitioner argues that since the trial Court's order was under Section 14 of the Securitisation Act, no act of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate can be questioned. The petitioner relies on a previous unreported order of the Court to support the maintainability of the Revision Petition.Issue II: Legal Remedy AvailableThe Court considers whether a Petition under Section 397 of Cr.PC against orders made under Section 14 of the Securitisation Act is maintainable. It clarifies that the Securitisation Act does not provide for appeal or revision against an order made under Section 14. The Court opines that the aggrieved party can approach the High Court under Section 482 of Cr.PC, which is akin to the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.Issue III: Final OrderThe Court notes that the previous order was not related to the maintainability of the Revision Petition. It highlights Section 14 of the Securitisation Act, emphasizing that no act of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate can be questioned. The Court rejects the Revision Petition as not maintainable but grants liberty to the petitioner to seek appropriate legal recourse. Additionally, any pending applications related to the Revision Petition are disposed of, and the necessary papers are to be returned to the petitioner's counsel.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
