<?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>1994 (2) TMI 268 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151089</link>
    <description>Sections 29 and 31 of the State Financial Corporations Act provide distinct remedies to a Financial Corporation: Section 29 enables direct recovery through takeover of management or possession of secured assets, while Section 31 provides a special court-based procedure for specified reliefs. The saving phrase &quot;without prejudice to the provisions of Section 29&quot; preserves the Corporation&#039;s independent right to proceed under Section 29 after resorting to Section 31, provided the two remedies are not pursued simultaneously. If the Section 31 order is not executed or is abandoned, the Corporation may withdraw from that route and invoke Section 29. The doctrine of election does not bar that course because the remedies differ in scope and operation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2025 12:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168128" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (2) TMI 268 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151089</link>
      <description>Sections 29 and 31 of the State Financial Corporations Act provide distinct remedies to a Financial Corporation: Section 29 enables direct recovery through takeover of management or possession of secured assets, while Section 31 provides a special court-based procedure for specified reliefs. The saving phrase &quot;without prejudice to the provisions of Section 29&quot; preserves the Corporation&#039;s independent right to proceed under Section 29 after resorting to Section 31, provided the two remedies are not pursued simultaneously. If the Section 31 order is not executed or is abandoned, the Corporation may withdraw from that route and invoke Section 29. The doctrine of election does not bar that course because the remedies differ in scope and operation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151089</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>