https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440688 Where an effective statutory remedy under the SARFAESI Act had already been invoked, the High Court declined to exercise writ jurisdiction under Article 226 to stop parallel recovery action, treating the fresh petition on identical prayers as not maintainable. It further held that a moratorium in insolvency proceedings against the borrower did not, by itself, bar enforcement against the personal guarantor's mortgaged property. The secured creditor was therefore entitled to proceed under SARFAESI against the guarantor, and the insolvency-based challenge was rejected as not affecting recovery in these facts. en-us Thu, 20 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Jul 2023 22:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440688 Where an effective statutory remedy under the SARFAESI Act had already been invoked, the High Court declined to exercise writ jurisdiction under Article 226 to stop parallel recovery action, treating the fresh petition on identical prayers as not maintainable. It further held that a moratorium in insolvency proceedings against the borrower did not, by itself, bar enforcement against the personal guarantor's mortgaged property. The secured creditor was therefore entitled to proceed under SARFAESI against the guarantor, and the insolvency-based challenge was rejected as not affecting recovery in these facts. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Thu, 20 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440688