Skip to content

CS Professional · Insolvency and Bankruptcy - Law and Practice · Debt Recovery and Securitization

Rao Steels Ltd. is sued by a bank for a debt falling within the matters specified in section 17 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993. Rao Steels wants to file a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution before the High Court. Is the High Court's jurisdiction barred by section 18?

The High Court's writ jurisdiction is not barred. Section 18 bars all courts and authorities from section 17 matters, but expressly excepts the Supreme Court and a High Court exercising jurisdiction under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The bank's consent is irrelevant.

  1. ANo, section 18 expressly excepts the Supreme Court and a High Court exercising jurisdiction under articles 226 and 227Correct
  2. BYes, no court or authority at all may exercise jurisdiction in those matters
  3. CYes, but only the Supreme Court is excepted
  4. DNo, but only if the bank consents to the High Court hearing it

Explanation

Section 18 bars every court or other authority in relation to section 17 matters, except the Supreme Court and a High Court exercising jurisdiction under articles 226 and 227. Hence the writ jurisdiction survives, and no consent of the bank is needed.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Debt Recovery and Securitization shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Debt Recovery and SecuritizationFree diagnostic mock

More Debt Recovery and Securitization questions