S.V.Enterprises - Legal Firm

S.V.Enterprises - Legal Firm M/s.K.R.Vijay & Associates (Legal)
DRAFTING SERVICES AVAILABLE
CIVIL/CRIMINAL/FAMILY AND OTHER CASES. TRIAL COURTS/HIGH COURTS/SUPREME COURT. M/S. Education
Ph.D.

K.R.Vijay & Associates - Legal Firm
Resolution, Enforcement & Recovery Agents under SARFAESI ACT,2002 FOR SBH, SBI, SBP & ORS
Professional Prof Expert handling of criminal, Civil, and Family Law matters. Legal Expert | Resolution Specialist | Property & Investigation Consultant
Highly accomplished legal professional with a Ph.D. in Law and an LL.M. in Constitutional Law from Osmania University. Of

fering over 15 years of specialized experience in debt recovery, dispute resolution, and comprehensive legal consultancy. Core Competencies
Legal Litigation: Expert handling of Criminal, civil, and family law matters. Banking & Finance: Specialized in DRT (Debt Recovery Tribunal) cases and SARFAESI Act procedures. Resolution Management: 15-year track record (2010–2025) as a Resolution Agent for State Bank of India (SBI), consistently achieving high recovery targets. Property Services: Proficient in land surveys, plot identification, and complex legal documentation. Specialized Investigations: Experienced in matrimonial investigations and background verifications. Professional Experience
Resolution Agent | State Bank of India (SBI) January 2010 – December 2025
Managed a diverse portfolio of distressed assets and non-performing assets (NPAs). Facilitated settlements through mediation and legal frameworks, maintaining an excellent track record of recovery. Navigated complex banking regulations to ensure compliant and effective resolutions. Legal Practitioner & Consultant
Representing clients in diverse litigation including matrimonial disputes and civil property suits. Providing end-to-end documentation services for real estate transactions. Conducting technical field work including land surveys and identifying clear-title plots for investors. in Law – Osmania University
LL.M. (Constitutional Law) – Osmania University
M.A. LL.B. – [Osmania University]
Why This Profile Works
The "Dr." Title: Leading with your Ph.D. immediately establishes authority and intellectual depth. SBI Tenure: 15 years with the country’s largest bank provides immense credibility in the financial and recovery sector. Versatility: You bridge the gap between "desk law" (constitutional/documentation) and "field law" (surveys/investigations).

S V Enterprises (www.resolutions.com) would appoint him as CEO. We are starting to look into the antecedents of bad debt...
21/03/2026

S V Enterprises (www.resolutions.com) would appoint him as CEO. We are starting to look into the antecedents of bad debt holders..

14/02/2026

Through BNS, which was replaced by IPC, according to section 270, Public Nuisance: A Public Nuisance is defined as any act or illegal omission that causes common injury, danger, or annoyance to the public or people living in the vicinity. Public nuisance is categorized into specific acts as below mentioned:
1) Negligent acts likely to spread infection (Sec 271): If any person willfully or negligently does or is likely to spread a dangerous disease, then they can face imprisonment up to 06 months or a fine or both.
2). Malignant acts likely to spread infection stated under section 272 of BNS: If the act is done maliciously (with intent), the punishment increases to imprisonment up to 2 years, a fine or both.
3) Adulteration of food or drink stated in section 274 of BNS: Manufacturing food or drink noxious/unfit for consumption carries to 06 months in jail or a fine up to Rs 5000/-
4). Dangerous Driving or Riding: As stated in section 281 of the BNS, riding or driving on a public way so rashly as to endanger human life can lead to imprisonment up to 06 months, a fine of up to Rs 1000/-, or both.
In these provisions, the most significant shift from the old IPC to the BNS is increasing fine amounts.

25/11/2025

*Top 50 Doctrines under CrPC/BNSS &IEA/BSA (with Sections & Case Laws)*

*1️⃣ Doctrine of Double Jeopardy*
Section: 300 CrPC / 357 BNSS
Case Law: Maqbool Hussain v. State of Bombay (1953)

*2️⃣ Doctrine of Speedy Trial*
Section: 309 CrPC / 346 BNSS
Case Law: Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar (1979)

*3️⃣ Doctrine of Fair Trial*
Section: 273 CrPC / 290 BNSS
Case Law: Zahira Habibulla v. State of Gujarat (2004)

*4️⃣ Doctrine of Autrefois Acquit/Convict*
Section: 300 CrPC / 357 BNSS
Case Law: State of Bombay v. S.L.. Apte (1961)

*5️⃣ Doctrine of Issue Estoppel
Section: Evidentiary Principle (Sectjon 40-43 Evidence/BSA)
Case Law: Piara Singh v. State of Punjab (1969)

*6️⃣ Doctrine of Presumption of Innocence*
Section: 313 CrPC / 343 BNSS
Case Law: Narayan v. State of Maharashtra (1976)

*7️⃣ Doctrine of Natural Justice*
Section: 273 CrPC / 290 BNSS
Case Law: Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)

*8️⃣ Doctrine of Severability*
Section: General Principle
Case Law: RMD Chamarbaugwala v. Union of India (1957)

*9️⃣ Doctrine of Mala Fide*
Section: General Principle
Case Law: S.R. Venkataraman v. Union of India (1979)

*1️⃣0️⃣ Doctrine of Proportionality*
Section: 235(2) CrPC / 352 BNSS
Case Law: Om Kumar v. Union of India (2000)

*1️⃣1️⃣ Doctrine of Zero FIR*
Section: 154 CrPC / 173 BNSS
Case Law: Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of UP (2014)

*1️⃣2️⃣ Doctrine of Electronic Evidence*
Section: 61-65 Evidence/BSA
Case Law: Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014)

*1️⃣3️⃣ Doctrine of Victim Rights*
Section: 372 CrPC / 439A BNSS
Case Law: Rekha Murarka v. State of WB (2020)

*1️⃣4️⃣ Doctrine of Bail as Rule*
Section: 436-439 CrPC / 478-484 BNSS
Case Law: State of Rajasthan v. Balchand (1978)

*1️⃣5️⃣ Doctrine of Compounding Offence*
Section: 320 CrPC / 360 BNSS
Case Law: Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012)

*1️⃣6️⃣ Doctrine of Cognizance*
Section: 190 CrPC / 210 BNSS
Case Law: R.R. Chari v. State of UP (1951)

*1️⃣7️⃣ Doctrine of Territorial Jurisdiction*
Section: 177 CrPC / 212 BNSS
Case Law: Naresh Kavarchand Khatri v. State of Gujarat (2008)

*1️⃣8️⃣ Doctrine of Transfer of Cases*
Section: 406 CrPC / 418 BNSS
Case Law: K. Anbazhagan v. State of Karnataka (2015)

*1️⃣9️⃣ Doctrine of Test Identification*
Section: 9 Evidence/BSA
Case Law: Budh Singh v. State of UP (1970)

*2️⃣0️⃣ Doctrine of Hostile Witness*
Section: 154 Evidence/BSA
Case Law: Sat Paul v. Delhi Administration (1976)

*2️⃣1️⃣ Doctrine of Dying Declaration*
Section: 32 Evidence/BSA
Case Law: Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay (1958)

*2️⃣2️⃣ Doctrine of Plea Bargaining*
Section: 265A-L CrPC / 293-302 BNSS
Case Law: State of Gujarat v. Natwar Harchandji (2005)

*2️⃣3️⃣ Doctrine of Compulsory FIR*
Section: 154 CrPC / 173 BNSS
Case Law: Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of UP (2014)

*2️⃣4️⃣ Doctrine of Protective Custody*
Section: 151 CrPC / 173(3)(4) BNSS
Case Law: Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014)

*2️⃣5️⃣ Doctrine of Anticipatory Bail*
Section: 438 CrPC / 482 BNSS
Case Law: Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab (1980)

*2️⃣6️⃣ Doctrine of Non-Cognizable Offence*
Section: 155 CrPC / 175 BNSS
Case Law: State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992)

*2️⃣7️⃣ Doctrine of Preventive Detention*
Section: 151 CrPC / 173 BNSS
Case Law: A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950)

*2️⃣8️⃣ Doctrine of Summons & Warrants*
Section: 61-90 CrPC / 68-97 BNSS
Case Law: Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab (1994)

*2️⃣9️⃣ Doctrine of Confession*
Section: 164 CrPC/ 183 BNSS
Case Law: Dagdu v. State of Maharashtra (1977)

*3️⃣0️⃣ Doctrine of Protection Against Self-Incrimination*
Section: 161(2) CrPC / 180(2) BNSS
Case Law: Nandini Sathpathy v. P.L. Dani (1978)

*3️⃣1️⃣ Doctrine of Charge Framing*
Section: 211-224 CrPC / 227-239 BNSS
Case Law: State of Bihar v. Ramesh Singh (1977)

*3️⃣2️⃣ Doctrine of Compelling Attendance*
Section: 61-90 CrPC / 68-97 BNSS
Case Law: Abdul Rehman Antulay v. R.S. Nayak (1988)

*3️⃣3️⃣ Doctrine of Acquittal on Benefit of Doubt*
Section: General Principle
Case Law: Kali Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh (1973)

*3️⃣4️⃣ Doctrine of Sentence Hearing*
Section: 235(2) CrPC / 352 BNSS
Case Law: Santa Singh v. State of Punjab (1976)

*3️⃣5️⃣ Doctrine of Pardoning Power*
Section: 306-307 CrPC / 337-338 BNSS
Case Law: Kehar Singh v. State (1988)

*3️⃣6️⃣ Doctrine of Judicial Review on Investigation*
Section: 156(3) CrPC / 175(3) BNSS
Case Law: Sakiri Vasu v. State of UP (2007)

*3️⃣7️⃣ Doctrine of Appeal*
Section: 372-394 CrPC / 421-455 BNSS
Case Law: P.S.R. Sadhanantham v. Arunachalam (1980)

*3️⃣8️⃣ Doctrine of Revision*
Section: 397-401 CrPC / 417-420 BNSS
Case Law: Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander (2012)

*3️⃣9️⃣ Doctrine of Compounding Civil Nature Offences*
Section: 320 CrPC / 360 BNSS
Case Law: JIK Industries v. Amarlal V. Jumani (2012)

*4️⃣0️⃣ Doctrine of Reinvestigation*
Section: 173(8) CrPC / 193 BNSS
Case Law: Vinay Tyagi v. Irshad Ali (2013).

*4️⃣1️⃣ Doctrine of Default Bail*
Section: 167(2) CrPC / 187(2) BNSS
Case Law: Rakesh Kumar Paul v. State of Assam (2017)

*4️⃣2️⃣ Doctrine of Judicial Custody*
Section: 167 CrPC / 187 BNSS
Case Law: CBI v. Anupam J. Kulkarni (1992)

*4️⃣3️⃣ Doctrine of Compulsory Appearance*
Section: 273 CrPC / 290 BNSS
Case Law: Mohd. Ajmal Kasab v. State of Maharashtra (2012)

*4️⃣4️⃣ Doctrine of Witness Protection*
Section: 309 CrPC / 346 BNSS
Case Law: Mahender Chawla v. Union of India (2018)

*4️⃣5️⃣ Doctrine of Victim Impact*
Section: 372 CrPC / 439A BNSS
Case Law: Ankush Maruti Shinde v. State of Maharashtra (2009)

*4️⃣6️⃣ Doctrine of Fair Investigation*
Section: Sec 156 CrPC / 175 BNSS
Case Law: Manohar Lal Sharma v. Principal Secy. (2014)

*4️⃣7️⃣ Doctrine of Cross-Examination*
Section: 137 Evidence/BSA
Case Law: State of Kerala v. Rasheed (2019)

*4️⃣8️⃣ Doctrine of Witness Hostility*
Section: 154 Evidence/BSA
Case Law: Sat Paul v. Delhi Administration (1976)

*4️⃣9️⃣ Doctrine of Contemporanea Expositio*
Section: General Principle of Statutory Interpretation
Case Law: K.P. Varghese v. ITO (1981)

*5️⃣0️⃣ Doctrine of Justice Delay is Justice Denied*
Section: 309 CrPC / 479 BNSS.
Case Law: Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar (1979).

04/11/2025

*SUPREME COURT OF INDIA*
SLP(C) No. 29687/2024
PC Hary
v.
Guruvayoor Devaswom Managing Committee
30/10/2025
*Rituals and practices performed as part of a long-standing religious tradition should not be disturbed on grounds of possible public inconvenience.*

04/11/2025

↗️
*SUPREME COURT OF INDIA*
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL Nos …… OF 2025
(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 3560-3561/2023)
KARAM SINGH VERSUS AMARJIT SINGH & ORS.
October 15, 2025.
*An application for rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC shall be decided based on the averments made in the plaint, and does not consider the defendant's defence or any external evidence.*

04/11/2025

*Criminal misappropriation of property under BNS (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita)*

*Criminal misappropriation of property is addressed under under Section 314 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). It deals with acts involving wrongful acquisition or use of another person's property with dishonest intent. In this article, we will focus on the details of Section 314 of BNS, examining its provisions and implications.*

*Section 314 of BNS outlines the offense of criminal misappropriation of property. Misappropriation involves the unauthorized use or possession of someone else's property. The important element here is dishonesty, implying an intention to deprive the rightful owner of their possession.*

*Elements of Section 314:*

*1. Wrongful Taking or Retaining Possession:*

- Dishonest misappropriation can occur through the wrongful taking or retaining of possession of another person's property without their consent.

*2. Intent to Deprive the Owner:*

- The offense involves an element of dishonest intent, indicating that the accused has the dishonest intention to permanently deprive the owner of their property.

*Legal Consequences:*

Engaging in dishonest misappropriation of property under Section 314 can lead to imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to two years and with fine.

*Examples Illustrating Section 314:*

*1. Unauthorized Use of a Vehicle:*

- If someone borrows a friend's vehicle without permission and uses it with the intent to keep it permanently, it could be considered dishonest misappropriation under Section 314.

*2. Unauthorized Possession of Goods:*

- Keeping items that belong to another person, knowing it's not rightfully theirs and with the intention of not returning them, falls under this section.

*Defenses and Legal Considerations:*

*1. Lack of Dishonest Intent:*

- If the accused can establish that there was no dishonest intent in their actions, it may serve as a defense against charges under Section 314.

*2. Consent and Authorization:*

- If the accused can demonstrate that they had the owner's consent or authorization for the use or possession of the property, it could impact the application of Section 314.

04/11/2025

◾️ *Remission under Section 473 of BNSS*
👉 Section 473 of BNSS reproduces what was provided under Section 432 of CrPC.

👉 Section 473 of BNSS provides for power to suspend or remit sentences.

▪️*Remission granted by whom and how (Section 473 (1) ) :*

The Appropriate Government may grant remission at any time ,This may be granted without conditions or upon any conditions which the person sentenced accepts

*By way of remission the Appropriate Government may:*

👉 Suspend the ex*****on of sentence, or

👉 Remit the whole or any part of the punishment to which he has been sentenced.

◾️ *Opinion of the Presiding Judge required (Section 473 (2) ):*

👉 While considering the application for remission the Appropriate Government may require the Presiding Judge of the Court who has convicted the person to state his opinion.

▪️*The opinion would be with regard as to whether application for remission should be granted or not. The above shall be accompanied with the following:*

👉 Reasons for the opinion

👉 A certified copy of the record of the trial

▪️ *Cancellation of order of Remission (Section 473 (3) ):*

👉 If any condition on which the sentence has been remitted or suspended is not fulfilled

👉 The Appropriate Government may cancel the suspension or remission.

👉 Such a person may if at large be arrested by any police officer without warrant and remanded to undergo the unexpired portion of the sentence.

31/08/2025

*WHAT IS SARFAESI ACT-- HOW IS IT RELATED TO DRT?*

*WHAT IS THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL (DRT)?*

DRT was established under the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 to provide an efficient mechanism for banks and financial institutions to recover dues from borrowers. The DRT object is to expedite the debt recovery process, which was delayed due to the burden of civil courts. The DRT has jurisdiction to handle cases where the amount of debt exceeds ₹20 lakhs.

*WHAT IS SARFAESI ACT ?*

The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) is to address the issue of Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) by enabling lenders to recover secured debts (i.e. Mortgages, Hypothecation, Pledge etc) directly from borrowers without the intervention of the Court or Tribunal. The Outstanding amount should be more than one Lakh. NBFCs and Cooperative Banks also comes under the purview of SARFAESI Act. The Agricultural Property does not comes under the purview of SARFAESI Act.

*RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SARFAESI AND DRT:*

The SARFAESI Act and Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) are interconnected as both are focused on facilitating the recovery of debts by banks and financial institutions, but they serve following roles in the recovery process

1. While SARFAESI allows lenders to take direct action to recover their loans, the Borrowers have the right to challenge the lender’s actions under SARFAESI in the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT). If a borrower feels that the bank's actions are unjust or have violated the provisions of SARFAESI, they can appeal to the DRT under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act.

2. The DRT acts as a check on the powers granted to banks under SARFAESI. It ensures that both the borrower’s rights as well as the lender's actions are protected in in accordance with the law. If the DRT finds the lender’s actions inappropriate or contrary to SARFAESI, it can order the return of the asset to the borrower or stop the sale.

3. The DRT is the primary tribunal for handling debt recovery cases, particularly for loans that do not qualify for SARFAESI enforcement, such as Unsecured Loans.

4. In some cases, banks may seek the assistance of the DRT to enforce their orders under SARFAESI, particularly if the borrower refuses to vacate the secured asset or creates obstructions. The DRT has the authority to issue orders to facilitate the lender’s enforcement actions.

5. If either the lender or borrower is dissatisfied with the decision of the DRT in SARFAESI related matters, they can appeal to the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT).

31/08/2025

*Important Applications*

*1. Application for Temporary Injunction. (ORDER 39 Rules 1 & 2)*

*2. Application for Rejection of plaint. (ORDER 7 Rules 11)*

*3. Application for Return of plaint. (ORDER 7 Rules 10).*

*4. Application for Amendment. (ORDER 6 Rules 16 & 17)*

*5. Application for Appointment of Commissioner. (Section 75 & ORDER 26).*

*6. Application for Appointment of Receiver. (ORDER 40)*

*7. Application for Amendment of issues, or Framing Additional Issues. (ORDER 14 Rule 5).*

*8. Application for production of a witness not mentioned in list of witnesses. (ORDER 16 Rule 1)*

*9. Application for production of document. (ORDER 13).*

*10. Application for Addition, deletion, or transposition of parties. (ORDER 1 Rule 10, sub-rule (2).*

*11. Application for Stay of Suit, “Res-subjudice”. (Section 10).*

*12. Application for Setting aside Exparte Proceedings and Exparte Decree. (ORDER 9 Rules 6 & 13).*

*13. Application for Restoration of Suit. (ORDER 9 Rule 9).*

*14. Application for Withdrawal of Suit, with or without permission to file fresh one. (ORDER 23).*

*15. Application for permission to sue as a Pauper. (ORDER 33).*

*16. Application for Review of Order/Judgment. (Section 114 and ORDER 47).*

14/10/2024

*HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR*
CRM(M) No.125/2023
CrlM No.309/2023
DR TANVEER HASSAN KHAN AND ORS
Vs.
ANDLEEBA REHMAN AND ANR.
04.09.2024.
In this persivative judgement, the Hon'ble HC has "clarified that proceedings under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (D.V. Act) are not strictly criminal in nature. Consequently, the bar preventing Magistrates from revoking or cancelling their own orders is not applicable in these cases, it added."*
*In his pronouncement on the nature of proceedings under the Act Justice Sanjay Dhar emphasized that Magistrates have the authority to drop proceedings against the accused parties if they find that no case is made out against them.*

Address

Https://goo. Gl/maps/BdAczMR7TFFpaKdG 7
Hyderabad
500017

Opening Hours

Monday 9am - 5pm
Tuesday 9am - 5pm
Wednesday 9am - 5pm
Thursday 9am - 5pm
Friday 9am - 5pm
Saturday 9am - 5pm

Telephone

+919391386239

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when S.V.Enterprises - Legal Firm posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Business

Send a message to S.V.Enterprises - Legal Firm:

Shortcuts

Share

Category