Debt Collection or Money Recovery Laws in India.

For Banking and Financial Institution for recovery their dues.

 

Section 17 in The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002

  1. Right to appeal.—

(1) Any person (including borrower), aggrieved by any of the measures referred to in sub-section (4) of section 13 taken by the secured creditor or his authorised officer under this Chapter, 1[may make an application along with such fee, as may be prescribed] to the Debts Recovery Tribunal having jurisdiction in the matter within forty-five days from the date on which such measures had been taken:—(1) Any person (including borrower), aggrieved by any of the measures referred to in sub-section (4) of section 13 taken by the secured creditor or his authorised officer under this Chapter, 1[may make an application along with such fee, as may be prescribed] to the Debts Recovery Tribunal having jurisdiction in the matter within forty-five days from the date on which such measures had been taken\:” 2[Provided that different fees may be prescribed for making the application by the borrower and the person other than the borrower.] 3[Explanation.—For the removal of doubts it is hereby declared that the communication of the reasons to the borrower by the secured creditor for not having accepted his representation or objection or the likely action of the secured creditor at the stage of communication of reasons to the borrower shall not entitle the person (including borrower) to make an application to the Debts Recovery Tribunal under sub‑section (1) of section 17.]3[Explanation.—For the removal of doubts it is hereby declared that the communication of the reasons to the borrower by the secured creditor for not having accepted his representation or objection or the likely action of the secured creditor at the stage of communication of reasons to the borrower shall not entitle the person (including borrower) to make an application to the Debts Recovery Tribunal under sub‑section (1) of section 17.]” 4[(2) The Debts Recovery Tribunal shall consider whether any of the measures referred to in sub‑section (4) of section 13 taken by the secured creditor for enforcement of security are in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder.

(3) If, the Debts Recovery Tribunal, after examining the facts and circumstances of the case and evidence produced by the parties, comes to the conclusion that any of the measures referred to in sub‑section (4) of section 13, taken by the secured creditor are not in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder, and require restoration of the management of the secured assets to the borrower or restoration of possession of the secured assets to the borrower, it may by order, declare the recourse to any one or more measures referred to in‑sub‑section (4) of section 13 taken by the secured assets as invalid and restore the possession of the secured assets to the borrower or restore the management of the secured assets to the borrower, as the case may be, and pass such order as it may consider appropriate and necessary in relation to any of the recourse taken by the secured creditor under sub‑section (4) of section 13.

(4) If, the Debts Recovery Tribunal declares the recourse taken by a secured creditor under sub‑section (4) of section 13, is in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder, then, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the secured creditor shall be entitled to take recourse to one or more of the measures specified under sub‑section (4) of section l3 to recover his secured debt.

(5) Any application made under sub‑section (1) shall be dealt with by the Debts Recovery Tribunal as expeditiously as possible and disposed of within sixty days from the date of such application: Provided that the Debts Recovery Tribunal may, from time to time, extend the said period for reasons to be recorded in writing, so, however, that the total period of pendency of the application with the Debts Recovery Tribunal, shall not exceed four months from the date of making of such application made under sub‑section (1).

(6) If the application is not disposed of by the Debts Recovery Tribunal within the period of four months as specified in sub‑section (5), any party to the application may make an application, in such form as may be prescribed, to the Appellate Tribunal for directing the Debts Recovery Tribunal for expeditious disposal of the application pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal may, on such application, make an order for expeditious disposal of the pending application by the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

(7) Save as otherwise provided in this Act, the Debts Recovery Tribunal shall, as far as may be, dispose of application in accordance with the provisions of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (51 of 1993) and the rules made thereunder.]

 

For filing the money recovery suit against the creditors.

 

 

Our lawyers and attorneys have filed numerous huge money recovery/debt collection suit before the district court and high court on behalf of individuals, Companies and financial institution to recover there debt etc. We use to file the recovery suit on the following 2 modes**:
If this too fails, either by way of the debtor not responding or refusing to make the payments, it may be necessary to institute legal proceedings against the debtor. Relevant papers in one’s possession that are related to the amount due (debt)debt or any documents of a similar sort including a copy of the correspondence between oneself and the debtor should be kept.
The limitation period for filing a civil recovery suit in India is 3 years. After that the claim is barred by time. It is imperative to decide which Court of law one should file their suit for recovery. In India, according to the Civil Procedure Jurisdiction, the pecuniary or monetary jurisdiction of the Courts depends on the state in which the cause of action arises. The pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court divides the Court on a vertical basis, which means that depending on the valuation of the suit filed, there are different levels of Courts with different monetary jurisdictions, and the suit will have to be instituted in the Court which has the required jurisdiction.  For example, the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Courts in Delhi areas follows:

  • Civil Judge before District Courts.
  • Senior Civil Judge ,District Courts
  • Addl. Districts Judge, Districts Courts.
  • Delhi High Court.
 
What is the Debt Recovery Suit/Money Suit under order XXXVII of C.P.C.(Suit Under Order 37 CPC)

A summary suit is instituted by presenting a plaint in the court containing the following specification ;
It must mention that the suit is filed under summary procedure and below the title of the suit it should be inscribed “Under Order XXXVII of code of Civil Procedure, 1908”.
It must state that no relief, which does not fall within the ambit of this rule, has been claimed.
Then the summons of the suit are to be issued to the defendant, which should be in prescribed from no. 4, accompanied with a copy of plaint and Annexures.
When the defendant appears, he is required to enter his appearance within 10 days of receipt of summons. On default of his appearance it is assumed that he has admitted the allegations made in the plaint and the plaintiff gets entitled to a final order granting him the sum as mentioned in the plaint along with interest at the specified date and costs if the Court thinks it appropriate. (Rule 2)

Where the defendant enters an appearance, the plaintiff is required to serve on him the summons for judgment in Form no. “4A) accompanied with an affidavit verifying the cause of action and the amount which is claimed in the plaint, and a statement to the effect that there is no defence to the suit.
Then, the defendant may apply for leave to defend the suit within 10 days from the date of service of summons, disclosing by way of an affidavit, such facts which he believes to be sufficient to entitle him of the right to defend himself.
The Court shall not refuse permission to the defendant to defend the suit unless it believes that the disclosure by the defendant does not show that he has any substantial defence to raise or that it is frivolous.
Also, where the defendant admits part of the amount claimed by the plaintiff, then the court shall permit the defendant to defend only, when such admitted amount is deposited by the defendant in the court.
The court may also require the plaintiff or the Defendant to deposit some security amount by way of costs, depending on the facts, i.e. to ensure the Bonafide of plaintiff or Defendant.

winding up petition against companies due to non payment of dues or debt.

A winding up petition is, therefore, not a legitimate means of seeking to enforce payment of the debt which is bona fide disputed by the company. The court is competent, in consideration of circumstances to refuse to pass an order of winding up even if the company is unable to pay its debts

Winding up is a process by which the affairs of the company come to an end. It has been described as “…a process whereby its life is ended and its property administered for the benefit of its creditors and members. An administrator, called liquidator, is appointed and he takes control of the company, collects its assets, pays its dues and finally distributes any surplus among the members in accordance with their rights”
The jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 433 is not that of a court which is essentially meant for settling money disputes between parties, but is to subserve the object of winding up of companies which have not paid their debts or which are unable to pay their debts3. Thus, the object of Section 433 is to provide a summary remedy and save the shareholders or creditors of a company, where a company is unable to meet its admitted liabilities.
Proceedings under Section 433 are not a substitute for a civil suit by a creditor against the company. The mere filing of a civil suit need not be an impediment to proceed with the company petition for winding up

Inability to Pay Debts by Companies
Section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956 provides that in cases where the company is unable to pay its debts the court can order winding up. The expression ‘unable to pay its debts’ has to be taken in the commercial sense of being unable to meet current demands though the company may be otherwise solvent6. The fact that the liabilities exceed the assets does not necessarily mean that the company is unable to pay its debts. It may still be in a position to meet the demands of the creditor when made7. However, where the court is satisfied upon a general perusal of the balance sheet that the company cannot pay its debts i.e., its assets are not sufficient to satisfy its liabilities, the court may order the winding up of the company.
The inability to pay debts primarily arise under three circumstances,

a.     Where the company fails to clear the debt of the creditor (a sum exceeding five hundred rupees) within three weeks immediately preceding the date of demand for payment being made

b.     Where execution or other process issued on a decree or order of any court in favour of the company is returned unsatisfied in whole or part and

c.     Where it is proved to the satisfaction of the court that the company is unable to pay its debts.

 
OUR SERVICES:
  • The attorney firm used to file order xxxvii CPC for recovery of money /debt in the cases where there are any written contract, dishonored, cheque ,bill of exchange, undies and promissory notes, in which the parties/client seeks only to recover a debt or liquidated demand in money payable by the opposite party/defendant with or without interest, arising.
  • The attorney of the firm also file on the basis of on an enactment, where the sum sought to be recovered is a fixed sum of money or in the nature of debt other than a penalty.
  • winding up petition against companies due to non payment of dues or debt.
  • Simple Money Suit on basis of Invoices and bills
  • Money Recovery Suit on basis of Dishonored of Cheque.
  • Money Recovery Suit on basis of Letter of Credit.
  • Suit for damages due to Business Loss by parties
  • Debt Recovery Arbitration
  • Suit related to Banking Cases or DRT Cases
  • Foreign or International Commercial debt recovery Law Suit
  • Foreign Award related to arbitrational  award of execution in India.
  • Foreign money recovery decree execution under Indian Laws.
  • Dealer or Distributors damages suit or money recovery suit.
  • Importers financial loss civil compensation suit
  • Exporters/National of International Firms/Companies Commercial or Money Suit.
  •          Leges Juris Associates
    • Advocates & Solicitors
    • A-381,Defence Colony,New Delhi
    • Phone: +91-11-40513913,9811114265

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *