https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111095 A withdrawal order may be recalled where later events show that restoring the petition is necessary to preserve the effect of a binding adjudication and prevent injustice. The High Court recalled the withdrawal and restored the petition. It also clarified that securitisation proceedings cannot be used to defeat a final settlement recorded by a competent Tribunal or to nullify a concluded decision on the same liability. The bank was therefore restrained from proceeding under the securitisation law for dues covered by the final settlement, while its right to act in accordance with law if the Tribunal's decision is later set aside was preserved. en-us Tue, 18 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Apr 2012 12:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111095 A withdrawal order may be recalled where later events show that restoring the petition is necessary to preserve the effect of a binding adjudication and prevent injustice. The High Court recalled the withdrawal and restored the petition. It also clarified that securitisation proceedings cannot be used to defeat a final settlement recorded by a competent Tribunal or to nullify a concluded decision on the same liability. The bank was therefore restrained from proceeding under the securitisation law for dues covered by the final settlement, while its right to act in accordance with law if the Tribunal's decision is later set aside was preserved. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 18 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111095