<?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>2008 (4) TMI 500 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111765</link>
    <description>Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act does not create an automatic stay on a secured creditor&#039;s right to proceed with auction, though the Tribunal may grant interim protection on suitable conditions, including deposit. Before final disposal under section 17, the Debts Recovery Tribunal or Appellate Tribunal cannot pass an interim mandatory order restoring possession or management, because restoration follows only a final finding that the measures under section 13(4) were not in accordance with the Act and Rules. The enquiry under section 17 covers all grounds that would make the bank&#039;s action illegal, but it is directed to the validity of the measures, not the exact quantum of debt.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2014 10:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148781" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (4) TMI 500 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111765</link>
      <description>Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act does not create an automatic stay on a secured creditor&#039;s right to proceed with auction, though the Tribunal may grant interim protection on suitable conditions, including deposit. Before final disposal under section 17, the Debts Recovery Tribunal or Appellate Tribunal cannot pass an interim mandatory order restoring possession or management, because restoration follows only a final finding that the measures under section 13(4) were not in accordance with the Act and Rules. The enquiry under section 17 covers all grounds that would make the bank&#039;s action illegal, but it is directed to the validity of the measures, not the exact quantum of debt.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111765</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>