Breaking SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMS PUBLIC DOMAIN PROTECTION FOR DIGITAL LAWS
New Delhi · Tuesday, 22 September 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law - free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2016-11-08 allowed

State Bank of Patiala vs Mukesh Jain & Anr

Bench: 2 — Anil R. Dave

In Brief

State Bank of Patiala lent Rs.8 lakh to a debtor who defaulted, prompting the bank to initiate recovery proceedings under the Securitisation Act. The debtor challenged these proceedings in civil court. The bank argued civil courts lack jurisdiction under Section 34 of the Securitisation Act. The courts rejected this, reasoning the Debt Recovery Tribunal had no jurisdiction because the debt was under Rs.10 lakh. The Supreme Court held that while the Tribunal's original jurisdiction requires a minimum debt of Rs.10 lakh, it has appellate jurisdiction under Section 17 of the Securitisation Act regardless of amount. Section 34 bars civil courts entirely; debtors must appeal to the Tribunal. The judgment was set aside.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Banking and Finance Debt Recovery Securitisation Jurisdiction of Courts Civil Procedure Tribunal Jurisdiction

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login