https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113973 The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the validity of a notice issued under section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. It held that the bank acted within its rights to issue a second notice after a delay, rejecting arguments of disproportionate mischief caused by the delay in proceedings. The court upheld compliance with RBI guidelines for classifying assets as non-performing and clarified that matters of debt recovery fall under the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, not civil courts. The importance of swift debt recovery for financial stability was emphasized. en-us Tue, 20 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Oct 2014 14:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113973 The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the validity of a notice issued under section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. It held that the bank acted within its rights to issue a second notice after a delay, rejecting arguments of disproportionate mischief caused by the delay in proceedings. The court upheld compliance with RBI guidelines for classifying assets as non-performing and clarified that matters of debt recovery fall under the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, not civil courts. The importance of swift debt recovery for financial stability was emphasized. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 20 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113973