Mrs. Justice V. Bhavani Subbaroyan

If Customer filed a suit against Bank and Employees/ex-employees for fraud and misappropriation committed in bank accounts, the suit is within the definition of Commercial dispute u/s 2(1)(c) of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and is perfectly maintainable before Commercial Court – Sivasubramaniam v. Shri Dhanalakshmi Spinntex Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. – Madras High Court

Hon’ble High Court of Madras held that:
(i) The employees of the 8th respondent / 1st Defendant bank had illegally handled the account of the plaintiffs, for which, the 1st defendant bank would be vicariously liable and hence the said transaction is a commercial dispute under 2(1)(c) of the Act, therefore, the 1st point is answered against the petitioner.
(ii) A bare reading of the Section 12A of Commercial Courts Act 2015 would make it clear that the mandate under Section 12A of Act, with regard to the pre-institution mediation is applicable only to the suits, which do not contemplate any urgent interim orders, on the other hand, the suits, which contemplate urgent interim relief, pre-institutions mediation is not necessary.

If Customer filed a suit against Bank and Employees/ex-employees for fraud and misappropriation committed in bank accounts, the suit is within the definition of Commercial dispute u/s 2(1)(c) of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and is perfectly maintainable before Commercial Court – Sivasubramaniam v. Shri Dhanalakshmi Spinntex Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. – Madras High Court Read Post »

The bar under Section 34 of SARFAESI Act, 2002 is absolute and civil jurisdiction is ousted to entertain any suit or proceedings in respect of any matter, which the DRT or appellate tribunal is empowered under the SARFAESI Act – M/s. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Vs. T. K. Karthikeyan – Madras High Court

Hon’ble High Court held that:
(i) There is a small distinction between Section 18 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 and the scope of 34 of SARFAESI Act, 2002
(ii) The scope of Section 34 is not one and the similar in its application. While Section 34 of SARFAESI Act contemplates ousting of civil jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceedings in respect of any matter which DRT or the Appellate Tribunal is empowered to determine under the SARFAESI Act, whereas, Section 18 of Recovery of Debt Due to bank and Financial Institution Act contemplates the bar of jurisdiction only in relation to matters specified under Section 17 of the Act therein.
(iii) The bar under Section 34 is absolute and civil jurisdiction is ousted to entertain any suit or proceedings in respect of any matter, which the DRT or appellate tribunal is empowered under the SARFAESI Act.

The bar under Section 34 of SARFAESI Act, 2002 is absolute and civil jurisdiction is ousted to entertain any suit or proceedings in respect of any matter, which the DRT or appellate tribunal is empowered under the SARFAESI Act – M/s. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Vs. T. K. Karthikeyan – Madras High Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top