The doctrine of election has no application under the SARFAESI Act and the RDDB Act, as there is neither repugnancy nor inconsistency between the two remedies – M/s. Swetha Exports Vs. Bank of India & Anr. – Andhra Pradesh High Court

Hon’ble High Court held that it is not as if the bank/financial institution is precluded from instituting proceedings either under the SARFAESI Act or the RDDB Act merely because they had invoked the provisions of the other enactment earlier. There are three elements to the doctrine of election, namely, existence of two or more remedies; inconsistencies between such remedies; and a choice of one of them. If any one of the three elements does not exist, the doctrine will not apply. The doctrine of election of remedies is applicable only when there are two or more co-existent remedies, available to the litigants at the time of election, which are repugnant and inconsistent. As there is neither repugnancy nor inconsistency between the two remedies under the SARFAESI Act and the RDDB Act, the doctrine of election has no application.

The doctrine of election has no application under the SARFAESI Act and the RDDB Act, as there is neither repugnancy nor inconsistency between the two remedies – M/s. Swetha Exports Vs. Bank of India & Anr. – Andhra Pradesh High Court Read Post »