https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107942 Once the bank abandoned specific performance and damages, the only surviving relief was recovery of a debt under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. Civil court jurisdiction was therefore barred under section 18, and exclusive competence vested in the Debt Recovery Tribunal under section 17. Jurisdiction could not be created by omission, acquiescence, or consent, so the civil decree would be a nullity if passed without legal authority. The Tribunal's earlier return order rested on the mistaken assumption that specific performance still survived and was set aside. en-us Fri, 20 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Mar 2012 18:25:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107942 Once the bank abandoned specific performance and damages, the only surviving relief was recovery of a debt under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. Civil court jurisdiction was therefore barred under section 18, and exclusive competence vested in the Debt Recovery Tribunal under section 17. Jurisdiction could not be created by omission, acquiescence, or consent, so the civil decree would be a nullity if passed without legal authority. The Tribunal's earlier return order rested on the mistaken assumption that specific performance still survived and was set aside. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 20 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107942