<?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>2005 (12) TMI 285 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111041</link>
    <description>Secured creditors may invoke SARFAESI enforcement under sections 13 and 14 even after a recovery certificate is issued under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, because the two remedies operate concurrently and the later statute is additional, not exclusive. A borrower does not cease to be a borrower merely because the Debts Recovery Tribunal has passed an order or a recovery certificate has been issued; the status continues so long as the financial liability remains unpaid. In a non-Metropolitan area, the Chief Judicial Magistrate is competent to exercise section 14 powers as the counterpart of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. The objections were rejected and the petition was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2012 18:53:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148057" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (12) TMI 285 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111041</link>
      <description>Secured creditors may invoke SARFAESI enforcement under sections 13 and 14 even after a recovery certificate is issued under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, because the two remedies operate concurrently and the later statute is additional, not exclusive. A borrower does not cease to be a borrower merely because the Debts Recovery Tribunal has passed an order or a recovery certificate has been issued; the status continues so long as the financial liability remains unpaid. In a non-Metropolitan area, the Chief Judicial Magistrate is competent to exercise section 14 powers as the counterpart of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. The objections were rejected and the petition was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111041</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>