Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The matter revolved around the Notification dated 29-05-2015 issued by the Central Government, containing instructions for the Framework for Revival and Rehabilitation of MSMEs.
In the case at hand, PVVNL had argued that the rights of electricity suppliers were not subordinate and subject to the ‘priority of claims’ mechanism under the IBC.
The Supreme Court considered the provisions of Section 15 to 23 read with Section 24 of the MSMED Act and the provisions of SARFAESI Act and stated that there is no repugnancy between the two enactments and no conflict between the specific subject of ‘priority' . It, hence, upheld the subsequent enactment of law with non-obstante clause in SARFAESI Act over MSMED Act.
Bombay High Court: The issue before the Court in the instant matter was that between a secured creditor (defined in
Bombay High Court: While deciding the instantwrit petition wherein the issue was regarding transgression of Additional District Magistrate’s jurisdiction under Section 14
Rajasthan High Court: In a case where the secured creditors like Unit Trust of India (‘UTI’) and a workman have preferred their