https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760194 A plaint alleging fraud and collusion in a loan, mortgage and enforcement transaction was treated as disclosing a narrow civil court exception to the bar under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act, because the pleadings contained specific factual averments rather than bare labels. For rejection under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, only the plaint and the documents relied on with it could be examined, not the defence version or material beyond the plaint. On that approach, the plaint could not be rejected at the threshold where it disclosed a triable civil cause of action. The supervisory challenge therefore succeeded and the plaint was restored. en-us Tue, 15 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Oct 2024 09:12:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760194 A plaint alleging fraud and collusion in a loan, mortgage and enforcement transaction was treated as disclosing a narrow civil court exception to the bar under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act, because the pleadings contained specific factual averments rather than bare labels. For rejection under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, only the plaint and the documents relied on with it could be examined, not the defence version or material beyond the plaint. On that approach, the plaint could not be rejected at the threshold where it disclosed a triable civil cause of action. The supervisory challenge therefore succeeded and the plaint was restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 15 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760194