https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114070 The SARFAESI Act's overriding effect prevails over the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, so pendency before BIFR and section 22 protection do not bar recovery once secured creditors take measures under section 13(4). The borrower's challenge to a section 13(2) demand notice is also premature where objections under section 13(3A) have been replied to and no section 13(4) measure has yet been taken, because the statutory remedy under section 17 arises only after such measures. The recovery proceedings may therefore continue, with the borrower left to pursue the post-measure remedy. en-us Tue, 15 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Dec 2014 17:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114070 The SARFAESI Act's overriding effect prevails over the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, so pendency before BIFR and section 22 protection do not bar recovery once secured creditors take measures under section 13(4). The borrower's challenge to a section 13(2) demand notice is also premature where objections under section 13(3A) have been replied to and no section 13(4) measure has yet been taken, because the statutory remedy under section 17 arises only after such measures. The recovery proceedings may therefore continue, with the borrower left to pursue the post-measure remedy. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 15 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114070