https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405238 The court dismissed the appeals, upholding decisions that the notice issued under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act was invalid due to non-compliance with Section 13(3), lacking detailed amount breakdowns. The court emphasized the importance of compliance for transparency and fairness, allowing borrowers to contest inaccuracies. Exemplary costs of Rs. 5 lakhs per appeal were imposed on the appellant-bank to deter frivolous litigation and preserve judicial resources. The judgment highlights the significance of statutory compliance in notices and the role of the DRT in upholding such standards. en-us Mon, 17 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Mar 2021 08:38:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405238 The court dismissed the appeals, upholding decisions that the notice issued under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act was invalid due to non-compliance with Section 13(3), lacking detailed amount breakdowns. The court emphasized the importance of compliance for transparency and fairness, allowing borrowers to contest inaccuracies. Exemplary costs of Rs. 5 lakhs per appeal were imposed on the appellant-bank to deter frivolous litigation and preserve judicial resources. The judgment highlights the significance of statutory compliance in notices and the role of the DRT in upholding such standards. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 17 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405238