https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284005 The court upheld the jurisdiction of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) to entertain the application by the respondents, determining that the respondents qualify as financial institutions under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. The court interpreted Section 18 of the Unit Trust of India (Transfer of Undertaking and Repeal) Act, 2002, as automatically substituting the names of the respondents wherever the Unit Trust of India is mentioned in relevant legislation. It was held that no further notifications or amendments were necessary for this substitution. The petition challenging the jurisdiction of the DRT was dismissed, affirming the maintainability of the application for recovery of dues. en-us Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Oct 2019 14:17:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284005 The court upheld the jurisdiction of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) to entertain the application by the respondents, determining that the respondents qualify as financial institutions under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. The court interpreted Section 18 of the Unit Trust of India (Transfer of Undertaking and Repeal) Act, 2002, as automatically substituting the names of the respondents wherever the Unit Trust of India is mentioned in relevant legislation. It was held that no further notifications or amendments were necessary for this substitution. The petition challenging the jurisdiction of the DRT was dismissed, affirming the maintainability of the application for recovery of dues. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284005