<?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>2011 (5) TMI 1139 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306770</link>
    <description>A private credit information company regulated under the Credit Information Companies (Regulation) Act, 2005 does not become a State or other authority under Article 12 merely because it is statutorily regulated, so no writ lies against it under Article 226 on that basis. However, disputes concerning the accuracy and storage of credit information fall within Section 18 of the Act, which requires resolution through conciliation or arbitration where no other remedy is provided. The Reserve Bank of India was therefore required to treat the application as a statutory reference and set the dispute-resolution mechanism in motion. The writ claim against the company failed, but relief was granted to the extent of directing consideration under the Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2023 16:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=705570" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (5) TMI 1139 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306770</link>
      <description>A private credit information company regulated under the Credit Information Companies (Regulation) Act, 2005 does not become a State or other authority under Article 12 merely because it is statutorily regulated, so no writ lies against it under Article 226 on that basis. However, disputes concerning the accuracy and storage of credit information fall within Section 18 of the Act, which requires resolution through conciliation or arbitration where no other remedy is provided. The Reserve Bank of India was therefore required to treat the application as a statutory reference and set the dispute-resolution mechanism in motion. The writ claim against the company failed, but relief was granted to the extent of directing consideration under the Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306770</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>