https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338033 The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the BIFR's order of de-registration. It found that BIFR had jurisdiction to order de-registration and permit creditor bank recovery under Section 22 of SICA. The court rejected fraud allegations due to lack of evidence and ruled that procedural requirements for notice were met. Additionally, it held that SARFAESI Act prevails over SICA, leading to the abatement of proceedings before BIFR as the bank had already initiated SARFAESI Act proceedings. en-us Fri, 16 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Jan 2017 08:19:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338033 The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the BIFR's order of de-registration. It found that BIFR had jurisdiction to order de-registration and permit creditor bank recovery under Section 22 of SICA. The court rejected fraud allegations due to lack of evidence and ruled that procedural requirements for notice were met. Additionally, it held that SARFAESI Act prevails over SICA, leading to the abatement of proceedings before BIFR as the bank had already initiated SARFAESI Act proceedings. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 16 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338033