<?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>2022 (2) TMI 1236 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302390</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the writ petition citing the availability of an alternative remedy under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The appellant has the option to appeal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal within two weeks without any limitation issue. Additionally, the bank is prohibited from taking further action for one week, as long as the petitioner does not change the secured asset.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 May 2022 15:47:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=679845" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (2) TMI 1236 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302390</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the writ petition citing the availability of an alternative remedy under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The appellant has the option to appeal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal within two weeks without any limitation issue. Additionally, the bank is prohibited from taking further action for one week, as long as the petitioner does not change the secured asset.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302390</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>