https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164795 The High Court held that it lacked jurisdiction to transfer a suit from a Civil Court to a Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) as it would oust the Civil Court's jurisdiction without statutory provisions. The power to transfer under the Code of Civil Procedure was deemed inapplicable to DRT transfers. The Court emphasized that DRT's jurisdiction is limited to bank applications for debt recovery, not independent suits by borrowers. Refusing to transfer under Article 142, the Court directed the Tribunal to expedite the bank's claims while upholding Civil Court jurisdiction. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the High Court's decision. en-us Wed, 29 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 May 2019 14:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164795 The High Court held that it lacked jurisdiction to transfer a suit from a Civil Court to a Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) as it would oust the Civil Court's jurisdiction without statutory provisions. The power to transfer under the Code of Civil Procedure was deemed inapplicable to DRT transfers. The Court emphasized that DRT's jurisdiction is limited to bank applications for debt recovery, not independent suits by borrowers. Refusing to transfer under Article 142, the Court directed the Tribunal to expedite the bank's claims while upholding Civil Court jurisdiction. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the High Court's decision. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 29 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164795