https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162560 An independent borrower's suit for damages was held to be separate from the bank's debt recovery claim because the causes of action, reliefs and proof required were materially different. The Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 was construed as not compelling transfer of such a borrower-initiated civil suit to the Tribunal as a counter-claim; its transfer and set-off provisions apply to proceedings contemplated within the statutory recovery framework, not to an independent suit filed outside it. An earlier observation allowing transfer was treated as fact-specific rather than a universal rule. The refusal to transfer the suit was therefore upheld. en-us Tue, 18 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Oct 2019 14:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162560 An independent borrower's suit for damages was held to be separate from the bank's debt recovery claim because the causes of action, reliefs and proof required were materially different. The Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 was construed as not compelling transfer of such a borrower-initiated civil suit to the Tribunal as a counter-claim; its transfer and set-off provisions apply to proceedings contemplated within the statutory recovery framework, not to an independent suit filed outside it. An earlier observation allowing transfer was treated as fact-specific rather than a universal rule. The refusal to transfer the suit was therefore upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 18 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162560