Mr. Justice Vikarmjit Sen

Whether a Company Court, directly or through an Official Liquidator, can wield any control in respect of sale of a secured asset by a secured creditor in exercise of powers available to such creditor under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 – Pegasus Assets Reconstruction P. Ltd. Vs. M/s. Haryana Concast Ltd. & Anr. – Supreme Court

A common issue of law is that whether a Company Court, directly or through an Official Liquidator, can wield any control in respect of sale of a secured asset by a secured creditor in exercise of powers available to such creditor under the SARFAESI Act, arises in all these matters which have been heard together and shall be governed by this common judgment. Hon’ble Supreme Court held that clear intention of the Parliament expressed in Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act that a secured creditor has the right to enforce its security interest without the intervention of the court or tribunal. At the same time, this Act takes care that in case of grievance, the borrower, which in the case of a company under liquidation would mean the liquidator, will have the right of seeking redressal under Sections 17 and 18 of the SARFAESI Act.

Whether a Company Court, directly or through an Official Liquidator, can wield any control in respect of sale of a secured asset by a secured creditor in exercise of powers available to such creditor under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 – Pegasus Assets Reconstruction P. Ltd. Vs. M/s. Haryana Concast Ltd. & Anr. – Supreme Court Read Post »

When in a contract of arbitration, certain disputes are expressly “excepted”, whether the Arbitrator can arbitrate on such excepted issues and what are the consequences if the Arbitrator decides such issues? – Harsha Constructions Vs. Union of India & Ors. – Supreme Court

Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me     Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here

When in a contract of arbitration, certain disputes are expressly “excepted”, whether the Arbitrator can arbitrate on such excepted issues and what are the consequences if the Arbitrator decides such issues? – Harsha Constructions Vs. Union of India & Ors. – Supreme Court Read Post »

Where the parties had agreed that no interest shall be payable, the Arbitral Tribunal cannot award interest – Union of India Vs. Bright Power Projects (I) P. Ltd. – Supreme Court

Section 31(7)(a) of the Act ought to have been read and interpreted by the Arbitral Tribunal before taking any decision with regard to awarding interest. The said Section, which has been reproduced hereinabove, gives more respect to the agreement entered into between the parties. If the parties to the agreement agree not to pay interest to each other, the Arbitral Tribunal has no right to award interest pendente lite.

Where the parties had agreed that no interest shall be payable, the Arbitral Tribunal cannot award interest – Union of India Vs. Bright Power Projects (I) P. Ltd. – Supreme Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top