The highlights of above ruling are as under:-
(a) Actions taken by the secured creditor u/s 13(4) (e.g. notice of possession) are open to scrutiny u/s 17. Such actions can not only be set aside but even status quo ante can be restored by the DRTs.
(b) Action u/s 14 constitutes an action taken after stage of section 13(4) and same would fall within the
ambit of of sec. 17 of the Act.
(c) Before filing any writ under Art 226 of the Constitution, the following should be considered whether:-
(i) adjudication of writ petition involves any complex and disputed questions of facts and whether they can be satisfactorily resolved;
(ii) the petition reveals all material facts;
(iii) The petitioner has any alternative or effective remedy for the resolution of the dispute;
(iv) person invoking jurisdiction is guilty of unexplained delay and laches;
(v) ex facie barred by any laws of limitation;
(vi) grant of relief is against public policy or barred by any valid law; and host of other factors.
Tags :Corporate Law