<?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>2013 (2) TMI 839 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197306</link>
    <description>Section 9 interim relief can be maintained even where a broader mortgage-enforcement issue may be non-arbitrable, so long as the relief sought does not amount to a final mortgage suit and the claim can proceed as a monetary or personal remedy in arbitration. Territorial jurisdiction may be established where a material part of the cause of action arises from the loan transaction and related acts within the forum, even if the mortgaged property is elsewhere. Applying Section 9 principles and the approach underlying Order 38 Rule 5 CPC, the Court also recognised a prima facie need for security and asset-preserving relief where default, financial stress, creditor pressure and risk of dissipation were shown.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2018 13:05:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=502106" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (2) TMI 839 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197306</link>
      <description>Section 9 interim relief can be maintained even where a broader mortgage-enforcement issue may be non-arbitrable, so long as the relief sought does not amount to a final mortgage suit and the claim can proceed as a monetary or personal remedy in arbitration. Territorial jurisdiction may be established where a material part of the cause of action arises from the loan transaction and related acts within the forum, even if the mortgaged property is elsewhere. Applying Section 9 principles and the approach underlying Order 38 Rule 5 CPC, the Court also recognised a prima facie need for security and asset-preserving relief where default, financial stress, creditor pressure and risk of dissipation were shown.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197306</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>