<?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>1999 (4) TMI 633 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195416</link>
    <description>The term &quot;debt&quot; under Section 2(g) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 was construed broadly to include any liability alleged as due to a bank in the course of business, whether secured or unsecured and whether recoverable under a decree or otherwise, provided it was legally recoverable on the date of the application. Jurisdiction under Section 17(1) depended on reading the plaint as a whole and identifying the substance of the claim; ancillary reliefs or the form of pleading did not alter the true character of a money recovery claim. On that basis, the claim fell within the Tribunal&#039;s exclusive jurisdiction, the civil court&#039;s jurisdiction was excluded, and the transferred suit was to be decided by the Tribunal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2017 12:36:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=494013" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (4) TMI 633 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195416</link>
      <description>The term &quot;debt&quot; under Section 2(g) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 was construed broadly to include any liability alleged as due to a bank in the course of business, whether secured or unsecured and whether recoverable under a decree or otherwise, provided it was legally recoverable on the date of the application. Jurisdiction under Section 17(1) depended on reading the plaint as a whole and identifying the substance of the claim; ancillary reliefs or the form of pleading did not alter the true character of a money recovery claim. On that basis, the claim fell within the Tribunal&#039;s exclusive jurisdiction, the civil court&#039;s jurisdiction was excluded, and the transferred suit was to be decided by the Tribunal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195416</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>