<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (10) TMI 227 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110898</link>
    <description>Claims arising from the same loan and cash credit transaction may be treated as a set-off or counter-claim when the borrower&#039;s damages claim and the bank&#039;s recovery claim stem from reciprocal obligations under the same relationship. The statutory scheme under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, read with the broad approach to counter-claims under the Code of Civil Procedure, allows the Tribunal to entertain the borrower&#039;s cross-claim even if framed as an independent suit. Where both proceedings involve common facts, common accounts, and overlapping evidence, transfer for joint trial is appropriate to avoid duplication and enable effective adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 May 2014 11:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=147914" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (10) TMI 227 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110898</link>
      <description>Claims arising from the same loan and cash credit transaction may be treated as a set-off or counter-claim when the borrower&#039;s damages claim and the bank&#039;s recovery claim stem from reciprocal obligations under the same relationship. The statutory scheme under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, read with the broad approach to counter-claims under the Code of Civil Procedure, allows the Tribunal to entertain the borrower&#039;s cross-claim even if framed as an independent suit. Where both proceedings involve common facts, common accounts, and overlapping evidence, transfer for joint trial is appropriate to avoid duplication and enable effective adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110898</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>