https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458409 The SARFAESI Act was treated as operating alongside Section 38 of the SIDBI Act, because the later enactment did not expressly repeal the SIDBI recovery remedy and Section 37 of the SARFAESI Act was read as saving other existing laws. The availability of both procedures was also said to confer unguided discretion on SIDBI, since the remedies differed materially in severity and procedural safeguards, making the choice vulnerable to challenge as arbitrary under Article 14. The commentary notes that relief was refused on the petitioner's facts, while SIDBI was cautioned to frame guiding criteria for future exercise of the choice of remedy. en-us Wed, 18 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Oct 2024 20:09:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458409 The SARFAESI Act was treated as operating alongside Section 38 of the SIDBI Act, because the later enactment did not expressly repeal the SIDBI recovery remedy and Section 37 of the SARFAESI Act was read as saving other existing laws. The availability of both procedures was also said to confer unguided discretion on SIDBI, since the remedies differed materially in severity and procedural safeguards, making the choice vulnerable to challenge as arbitrary under Article 14. The commentary notes that relief was refused on the petitioner's facts, while SIDBI was cautioned to frame guiding criteria for future exercise of the choice of remedy. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 18 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458409