9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 906X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould not be available, especially, when the appellants are guarantors - term ‘suit’ have to be confined in the context of sub-section (1) of Section 22 of SICA to those actions which are dealt with under the Code and not in the comprehensive over-arching proceedings so as to apply to any original proceedings before any legal forum. The term ‘suit’ would apply only to proceedings in civil court and not actions or recovery proceedings filed by banks and financial institutions before a Tribunal such as DRT - Decided against appellant. - Civil Appeal No. 11029 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 13-12-2013 - K.S. Radhakrishnan and A.K. Sikri, JJ. Shri Gagan Gupta, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Sumit Bansal, Ateev Mathur and Shantanu Kumar, A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Case No. 14 of 2009. 4. The Bank instituted Original Application OA No. 118 of 2009 in DRT on 13-5-2009. In the recovery proceedings notices were issued by the DRT to all the defendants, which included the appellants as well. On 14-12-2009 the appellant, along with RPL preferred an application under Section 22(1) SICA which was registered as OA No. 1046 of 2009. They sought dismissal of IA since the same was filed without prior permission of the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (for short AAIFR )/BIFR in terms of Section 22(1) of SICA. The DRT took the view that the execution of the decree had to be kept in abeyance until the question whether the guarantors were entitled to protection under Section 22(1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Appellants, who are the guarantors, can obtain the protection of Section 22(1) of SICA only if the action filed by the bank comes within the ambit of the term suit . If the action filed by the respondent bank in the nature of proceedings and not a suit , protection under Section 22(1) would not be available, especially, when the appellants are guarantors. 7. This Court, in KSL and Industries Limited (supra) took the view that even though both the conflicting statutes SICA and Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (for short the RDDB ) contain a non-obstante clause, in case of conflict the RDDB Act, 1993 will prevail over SICA, so far as public revenue recoveries are concerned. This Court also emphasiz ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
