Debt Recovery Tribunal Not Empowered In Law To Restrain A Debtor's Fundamental Right To Travel Abroad

Last updated: 13 June 2022
Quick Summary
The Bombay High Court has ruled that Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRTs) do not possess the legal authority to prevent individuals from travelling abroad. The court affirmed that the right to travel overseas is a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. It emphasised that any restriction on this right must be based on a specific law enacted by the legislature, which is currently absent in the relevant acts governing DRTs.

Court :
Mumbai High Court

Brief :
The Constitution of India provides its citizen some fundamental rights which can be restricted or taken out on through well established law of the land. The Article 21 provides us right of " Personal Liberty" and it is a fundamental right , we have right to travel any part of India as well as abroad. The Debt Recovery Tribunal has not power to restrain a person from travelling abroad, if it is done then it is violation of fundamental rights of a citizen of India.

Citation :
WRIT PETITION NO. 2826 OF 2022

Daily Limit Reached

You have reached your daily limit of 2 Free Judgements

Subscribe to CCI PRO for unlimited access

Why Upgrade to CCI PRO?
  • No Ads
  • WhatsApp Broadcasts
  • Daily E-Newsletter
  • Unlimited Judgements Access
BEST VALUE
2 YEAR PLAN
3,499
(Inclusive of GST)
1 YEAR PLAN
1,999
(Inclusive of GST)
View all CCI PRO benfits

Already a PRO member? Login here for an ad-free experience.

 
Comments


Recent Judgments :

  1. Forest Development Tax Demand, Collection and Refund Subject to Final Outcome of Pending Cases
  2. SC : Extended Limitation Cannot Be Invoked Where Department Was Aware of Valuation Facts
  3. SC : Selling Shares While in Possession of UPSI Constitutes Insider Trading Even if No Profit Is Made
  4. SC : Laser Imagers Compatible with Machines Under Different Tariff Headings Classifiable Under CTH 9033
  5. Education Consultancy Services to Foreign Universities Not Intermediary Services; Refund of IGST on Export of Services Allowed
  6. Penalty Cannot Be Confirmed Beyond What is Specified in Statutory Form GST DRC-01
  7. Non-Supply of Field Visit Report Vitiates Rejection of Revocation Application
  8. Alternative Remedy before GSTAT to be Exhausted Despite Allegation that Adjudication Travelled Beyond SCN
  9. ITAT Jodhpur: AO Allows ₹2.61 Crore Deduction under Sections 54EC and 54F; Assessee's Appeal Dismissed as Infructuous
  10. CESTAT Revokes Suspension of Customs Broker Licence for Non-Compliance with Mandatory 15-Day Hearing Requirement

View More Judgments »


Trending Online Classes

view all classess

CCI Pro
Meet our CAclubindia PRO Members
Pro Member THUSHAR MURALI KRISHNATHUSHAR MURALI KRISHNAPro Member Somnath HegdeSomnath HegdePro Member HITESH PATELHITESH PATELPro Member DEEPAK BHARGAVADEEPAK BHARGAVAPro Member SANJAY GAIROLASANJAY GAIROLA
Subscribe to Pro
Join an elite circle of professionals

Browse by Category